Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 19

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< October 18	October 20 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

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

The result was delete‎. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clare Dimyon

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

There's only one article (After Ellen) that is significant coverage of Clare Dimyon. The MBE is the UK's lowest state honour, with hundreds awarded every year. There are simply too many of them being awarded to make anyone who receives them notable Ynsfial (talk) 16:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and United Kingdom. Ynsfial (talk) 16:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Estonia, Latvia, Russia, and Slovakia. Bridget (talk) 19:18, 12 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, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete The sources in the article seem reliable but I'm not sure if they're enough to establish notability. Her activism is discussed in books in both German[1] and English[2] but I'm unsure if the mentions in the books reach the level of WP:SIGCOV. If they do, someone ping me and I'll switch to Keep. Brocade River Poems (She/They) 00:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge‎ to Vande Bharat Express. (non-admin closure) Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vande Bharat (Sleeper) Express

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

as per the pervious discussion above. Not enough sources to state this is a different service from Vande Bharat Express SKAG123 (talk) 23:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. SKAG123 (talk) 23:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Vande Bharat Express as per nom.
SKAG123 (talk) 23:03, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Vande Bharat Express: There is no indication that this would be a separate service. If, in the future, it is announced that this is a separate service, we can create an article for that service. Arnav Bhate (talk • contribs) 08:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as suggested and Too Soon. Bearian (talk) 15:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Vande Bharat Express is logical suggestion.--Indian Agent (talk) 20:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge due to Too Soon seems acceptable. Bunnypranav (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The current article literally just reads like a train model article.

I haven't gone through all the sources on the Vande Bharat Express (mostly because it's way more comprehensive). I'm just trying to understand why someone would make this article, instead of just adding a section. Both the Vande Bharat (sleeper trainset) and Vande Bharat Express Articles already both exist.

I say, Merge but after they go into use on the Vande Bharat Express. RCSCott91 (talk) 02:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:47, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vidya Vathi

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

No reliable sources. Sakshi source doesn't seem to mention her. Not sure if meets WP:NACTOR because the three films that she played lead roles in do not have sources or Wikipedia articles. DareshMohan (talk) 18:01, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Andhra Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:08, 12 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!} 23:00, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete: I could not find any significant coverage of the subject, actually I could not find mention in any reliable sources. That makes the subject fail general notability guidelines. The subject also fails notability criteria for actors as she doesnt have significant roles in any notable film. Whatever credits the actress has for notable films, are not significant. —usernamekiran (talk) 01:49, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Jews in Laos

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

Singular source which references the article itself, Laos is apparently the least antisemitic country (because there are almost no Jews there.) This is just not a significant community at all. Gazingo (talk) 21:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, one source and the only thing it says about the Jewish community there is basically that there are no Jews in Laos. Andre🚐 04:49, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, obviously. This article about the history of Jews in Laos just says there is no history, no community and only four Jews. Ridiculous. Zero^talk 11:54, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:59, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kenji Tanaka (footballer, born 2001)

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

I don't see much notability being granted by his playing 502 minutes of soccer in a lower tier in the US; after signing for a lowly team in the Brazilian Série D (not professional) he did not play at all, according to Soccerway. The Globo Esporte article about his signing looks like a press release, judging from the language and the pictures. Thus, this falls short of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 20:53, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Brazil. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:GNG. No evidence of WP:SIGCOV.Demt1298 (talk) 19:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – He only played for Orlando City B, in Brazil he did not make any appearances for Portuguesa-RJ. No longer professionally active [3]. Svartner (talk) 21:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 07:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - A search has resulted in me not finding anything notable even when searching for "Kenji Tanaka De Paula"--Brocade River Poems (She/They) 00:30, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Limited evidence of notability upon search. Unable to validateWP:GNG Trex32 (talk) 03:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kenji Tanaka (footballer, born 1983)

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

Failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT, with no significant and independent coverage (including in the ja:wiki, where all sources are primary), and 18 games in Japan's second and third leagues being his claim to notability. Creator is blocked indefinitely. Geschichte (talk) 20:47, 19 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)} 20:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 07:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I cannot find any significant coverage. --Brocade River Poems (She/They) 00:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria Park Presbyterian Church

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

I believe that this church has not existed for a good number of years. I was told that the property at 2712 Victoria Park Avenue had been sold. It is currently the location of Christ Emmanuel Community Church. Google Street View shows this church's signage prominently displayed on the building as long ago as May 2009. PeterR2 (talk) 19:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Christianity. PeterR2 (talk) 19:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Speedy keep.~~ No valid deletion rationale has been offered. Instead we have an WP:OUTOFBUSINESS argument. Notability once gained cannot be lost. This church may not have been notable to begin with (the nominator gives no indication of a WP:BEFORE) but even if it’s not, no policy-based rationale to delete has been advanced. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I wasn't aware of that, and assumed that articles about no-longer-existent places got closed down unless they had a sufficient long-term relevance - since articles to which I have contributed have more than once been deleted without adequate reason - notably [David MacIntyre] was replaced by some ephemeral modern hockey player and moved to [David McIntyre (minister)] and then deleted, despite the fact that MacIntyre was an early Principal of an influential college - International Christian College, formerly Bible Training Institute, which lasted over a century and was very well known in evangelical circles in Scotland. Also the page about the Presbyterian Reformed Church (North America) which still exists, and is still mentioned in other Wikipedia articles, was deleted - see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Reformed_Christianity/Article_alerts/Archive_1#AfD PeterR2 (talk) 14:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PeterR2, if you reformat your nomination to address how the subject of the article fails WP:NCHURCH and show evidence of a WP:BEFORE search for potential sources not included in the article, I would reconsider my !vote. (The raising of other deletion discussions is generally irrelevant per WP:OTHERSTUFF, but I'll address them briefly: David McIntyre (minister) was an uncontested WP:PROD, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Presbyterian Reformed Church (North America) was closed as soft delete; both can be revived upon request at WP:REFUND, at which point they would have to be brought up at AfD again if editors still think they should be deleted. I can only speak to the latter, which I nominated, because I didn't believe it passed the WP:GNG or WP:NORG, the relevant notability guidelines.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There does not appear to be a church by this name in Canada. Article has no sourcing whatsoever. The only church I find by that name, is in Australia. — Maile (talk) 02:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can assure you it did exist - I am assuming Victoria Park Presbyterian Church was its local name - it was a congregation of the Associated Presbyterian Churches from their inception in 1989 onwards, having previously been in the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland. Unfortunately the 2007 Google Street View is of too poor quality to see what any signage may have said! See also An Historical Sketch of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland in North America - it seems likely that the author of that article is not a representative of any of the denominations concerned, though his sympathies obviously lie with the Free Presbyterians. In any case the name is mentioned at Montgomery Library Archives of Westminster Theological Seminary and at various directory sites. PeterR2 (talk) 14:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I take your word for that. — Maile (talk) 23:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Well, it existed [4]. That's not enough to vote either way, but it's real. Oaktree b (talk) 23:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to lack of significant coverage, and my own standards for churches. It might exist, but we can’t write an encyclopedia article around listings and church inside debates. It’s not so old a church building that it’s automatically noted for its historical value. Bearian (talk) 03:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The AfD indeed qualified for a Speedy Keep closure due to the deficient nomination. However, now with two valid Delete !votes, the nomination no longer matters, so I'm relisting this in the hope of additional substantive arguments either way.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. With the speedy mooted, I see no evidence this congregation met GNG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You mean you see no evidence that it called itself "Victoria Park Presbyterian Church" or that the Associated Presbyterian Churches had a congregation in Toronto? I gave links that demonstrate both above in my reply to Maile. I suspect I would agree in regard to notability, however. PeterR2 (talk) 23:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing in google news or books, which is unusual for a Canadian entity. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Desktop virtualization. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Workspace as a Service

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

Extended dictionary definition created directly to main by a novice editor. The topic is already included in As a service, so there is no rationale for a new stub. Original editor objected to a PROD (with some non-WP comments) on the talk page, so I am converting it to an AfD. Delete unless someone turns this into a real encyclopedic article, which I am dubious about. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As noted, nothing more than a glorified dictionary definition at the moment and I fail to see a significant amount of unique content that could go there at the moment. If this becomes an actually significant concept that demands its own artilce in the future, we can build an article then. No use keeping a stub as a WP:CRYSTALBALL. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 23:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ldm1954 proposed this article to be deleted and said "There is already an entry in As a service. At most this should be replaced by a redirect and the sources added to that page". But according to that line of thinking, the article Windows 11 should also not exist because there is an entry about it at Microsoft Windows. Same for iPhone 8, Samsung Galaxy S8 and many others. Workspace as a Service looks too me like a stub that has the potential to be developed in the future as more companies are starting to provide such a service - just like the other stubs mentioned in the as a service article, like for example Blockchain as a service, Content as a service or Logging as a service. Arwenz (talk) 20:53, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that unlike Windows 11, this article does not have sufficient media coverage or exploration. If it becomes more explored in the future, then we can resurrect the article when that happens. However, as it stands, we simply don't see anything worth more than just looking at the title at the moment. Delete per above. (And per WP:OtherStuffExists, the last three articles you linked have very valid arguments for deletion as well.) Aaron Liu (talk) 19:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect - I've read all the references and still don't understand how WaaS is not just a minor variation of desktop virtualization. Brandon (talk) 04:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Either to desktop virtualization or a section thereof (preferred) or as a service#Workspace as a Service. No objection to deletion either if closer believes consensus is unclear between that and redirect, though if the issue is with targeting that's really RfD's problem, not ours. As far as I can tell, it's just "VDI but cloud", and that's about as clear of a WP:NOPAGE as we're going to get. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with a redirect to either and preferably the latter. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (to any page depending on consensus). It has a lot of room for improvement, so would not suggest delete. Bunnypranav (talk) 16:24, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Energy-assisted magnetic recording

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

Novice user created this page which is an extended WP:DICTIONARY definition. There already exists a page on Heat assisted magnetic recording, and Microwave assisted magnetic recording is mentioned in quite a few existing pages. I added a PROD, but novice editor objected (on Talk page) so I am coverting it to an AfD. A decent article on Microwave assisted magnetic recording is a something that might be done, but this page is just an WP:DICTIONARY stub that combines heat and microwave without providing useful encyclopedic information. TNT as this is not a good starting point. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ldm1954 proposed this article to be deleted and said "Both heat and microwave assisted magnetic recording pages already exist. There is no reason to duplicate." It is true that the article HAMR (heat assissted) exists but the article MAMR (microwave assisted) does not exist. HAMR and MAMR are forms of EAMR just like Windows 11 and Windows 10 are forms of Microsoft Windows and they still deserve their own articles. Ldm1954 wants to delete my contributions, as I mentioned at Talk:Workspace as a Service. This article is not a dictionary definition, I did my best to create an enciclopedic stub. Arwenz (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make inappropriate statements such as "Ldm1954 wants to delete my contributions". As part of WP:NPP I and others review new pages and check if they are appropriate. This one, as well as a couple of other stubs you have created fail standard review criteria. Please be more careful, and look at what is in other articles, read up on the notability guide in WP:Notability and also look at details such as the style guide WP:MOS and what Wikipedia is not WP:!. I think you have rushed in a bit, which is why you got blocked in July and have also had several articles removed or moved to draft space as well as edits reverted since July 2024. Ldm1954 (talk) 20:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment EAMR and Energy-assisted magnetic recording both seem like plausible search terms and so do Microwave assisted magnetic recording and MAMR. Ideally each of those would be a redirect, disambiguation, or other article. I have no opinion on whether WP:TNT applies, but if it does, redirecting somewhere to an appropriate section of HAMR seems like the thing to do in the mean time. McYeee (talk) 19:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per lack of significant coverage - a mix of original research and blogs with one primary source for color. Bearian (talk) 15:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per same reasoning as Bearian. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 01:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Director's Kut Productions. as an ATD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rajan Shahi

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV and notable sources, more like paid pr page. Suspected creation by sockpuppet. Imsaneikigai (talk) 16:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor to unreliable sources with no significant coverage on the subject in secondary independent reliable sources. Fails WP:NDIRECTOR and WP:NBIO. RangersRus (talk) 14:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Doesn't qualify for soft-deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Director's Kut Productions: mentioned there as founder. His credits include notable productions as director but with other directors; and the awards seem to be collective/to the work and not personal. But if other users think it's enough, not fiercely opposed to Keep. Not in favour of deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:02, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as suggested. Most of his awards were as a producer of “Most Popular show” types, or for longtime productions. It’s unclear whether he just financed the films or had any creative involvement. Bearian (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. I see a consensus to Delete this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:05, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A. P. Unnikrishnan

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

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG TheWikiholic (talk) 14:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. TheWikiholic (talk) 14:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:GNG is passable, reliable sources are available Spworld2 (talk) 10:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Spworld2 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not pass WP:NPOL. Mccapra (talk) 21:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Consider WP:GNG Spworld2 (talk) 05:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not passing WP:NPOL. It literally says “Local Government” in one source. The other sources say he’s active in his party and Dalit community with literally thousands of other people. Bearian (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned before, how can only one of the ten thousand become an office holder? [5] Spworld2 (talk) 05:36, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete:per all of the above. Fails NPOL and GNG.202.83.51.246 (talk) 17:28, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The user with the IP address (202.83.51.246) discussed above is a first time wikipedia editor, and like other experience users, feels like WP:SOCK----- Spworld2 (talk) 10:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. The consensus is to Delete this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

M. A. Mohammed Jamal

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

Subject fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG TheWikiholic (talk) 14:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. TheWikiholic (talk) 14:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:GNG is passable, There are reliable sources Spworld2 (talk) 11:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Spworld2 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - political party activists are not automatically notable, and there is no coverage outside of party politics. Bearian (talk) 16:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not just a political activist but also a former office holder [6] Spworld2 (talk) 05:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above, not an actual holder of a political position, just a party activist. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 02:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A former office holder of a party with national focus and presence in more than two states, may now be considered in the WP:GNG category, depending on the source [7]. Spworld2 (talk) 05:49, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails NPOL and no independent significant coverage. 202.83.51.246 (talk) 17:26, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The user with the IP address (202.83.51.246) discussed above is a first time wikipedia editor, and like other experience users, feels like WP:SOCK----- Spworld2 (talk) 10:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. If you are going to argue that sources exist that help establish GNG, you need to point out which ones they are. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manaf (Lorry Udama Manaf)

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

A non notable Internet personality who falls short of WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. He seems to be related to a notable event but per WP:NOTINHERITED that doesn’t count. TheWikiholic (talk) 14:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Internet, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are many sources that prove notability, pass WP:GNG -- Spworld2 (talk) 9:44, 19 October 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Spworld2 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. His own channel, a deprecated newspaper, and blogs are not reliable sources. Wikimedia is currently embroiled in a lawsuit in India filed against us for even mentioning a person’s name in a a overbroad definition of a BLP violation. I’m going to delete the whole controversy section; without it there’s just nothing that’s gotten any attention. Bearian (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete:Nothing worth to guarantee and independent article. Also applies RUNOFFTHEMILL policy.202.83.51.246 (talk) 17:31, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayisha Abdul Basith

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

Fails WP:SINGER and WP:GNG. TheWikiholic (talk) 13:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Internet, United Arab Emirates, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep-Multiple sources having non-trivial mentions about article to maintain WP:GNG.Irshadpp (talk) 08:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, Youtuber fails WP:GNG, coverage is trivial, PR pieces. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:18, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I agree with this. Although there's one of citation that appeared as "Independent", that one her feature story on Gulf News, but the intent and tone of the writing is dubious to say the least. The rest of citations I can assure that they're indeed PR pieces which written surrounding her performance at Salim-Sulaiman's annual music event, "Bhoomi" 2022. So, even though I myself one of the contributor of this article, but my intention was to put some critical information regarding her affiliations and that time there was a "Citation Needed" in one of the section, even though I myself was surprised and confused by this article's existence. So, I'm in favor for deletion of this article. Also for @TheWikiholic can you check its article that on Bangla Wikipedia? Maybe you can asses that one too. Thank you. Salaam -dsab Drhyhanna (talk) 04:54, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I add her AllMusic's link, can it save this article from being deleted. But, there's a potential backlash regarding her AllMusic profile, it was created as part of submission by Salim-Sulaiman's Merchant Records, by their associated music agencies: Global Music Junction and Warner Music India. So, her releases that listed there were her releases/associated releases that under Merchant Records, not by her current contracted label, Andante Music. It's the link: https://www.allmusic.com/artist/ayisha-abdul-basith-mn0004311198#credits if you want to check. Please reply so we can discuss it further. Thanks for consideration. Salaam -dsab Drhyhanna (talk) 05:54, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - winner of two made up in one day awards for up and coming but ultimately non-notable musician as we define them. I must add in that an Allmusic entry adds to significant coverage, but we still required two additional reliable sources, which I don’t see here. If you find them, please ping me. Soft delete per past cases of young singers who may be notable later but are not yet. Bearian (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - After digging throughout the internet, and find no other articles that at least have balanced coverage about the subject, the more sensible option is to delete the article. Drhyhanna (talk) 16:27, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
YouTuber [8]category can be considered ?? Spworld2 (talk) 09:24, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Look, I couldn't find reliable sources that provide balanced or substantial coverage about the subject beyond metrics on YouTube. WP:GNG emphasizes the need for significant coverage in multiple independent sources to establish lasting notability. While YouTube metrics do demonstrate popularity, WP:NYOUTUBE specifically requires more than just metric counts to justify this article's presence. Even if the category is 'YouTuber,' Wikipedia's focus remains on substantial third-party coverage, which seems to be lacking here. So, sorry, unless Al Jazeera or BBC somehow came into her house (you got my point, right?), that it's should be deleted for now, and maybe after there's more coverage, you can revive this article later. Drhyhanna (talk) 03:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we need to define "Who is Ayisha Abdul Basith really?". From my observation, she's in the same spectrum as Woro Widowati, Denny Caknan, or Idgitaf, a musician/singer/musical artist who emerge from social media through their initial covers but then evolved as a cultural icon for their community, and thus generate a lot of coverage of about each of them. Sure, "YouTuber" might apply to her, but again we should ask, who's Ayisha nowadays, in which spectrum she's really belong to. Hope you understand. Salaam Drhyhanna (talk) 12:57, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is a youtuber [9][10] (Subscribers: 4.11 million , Total views 625.7 million) YouTube/Notability#Keep, youtube info has been added, it is passable to WP:GNG ref:-[11] and WP:NYOUTUBE ~ Spworld2 (talk) 11:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Spworld2 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]
Subscription counts don't make the subject notable per WP:NYOUTUBE. TheWikiholic (talk) 10:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Youtuber who fails WP:SINGER and WP:GNG. 202.83.51.246 (talk) 17:24, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The user with the IP address (202.83.51.246) discussed above is a first time wikipedia editor, and like other experience users, feels like WP:SOCK----- Spworld2 (talk) 10:01, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rajiv Jain (politician)

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

Mentions in independent sources are only appointment news, not elected to any legislative body, only held unelected post within the party, lack independent sources which talk about the subject in depth, fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG TheSlumPanda (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Haryana. TheSlumPanda (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not pass WP:NPOL. Mccapra (talk) 22:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete party members with election to any level of government. Fails WP:NPOL.Adamantine123 (talk) 00:51, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom fails WP:NPOL. Poor sources with no notable coverage on the subject. The subject does not seem to warrant a biographical page because of no significant, interesting, or unusual enough coverage to deserve attention or to be recorded. RangersRus (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. How many times do we have to repeat that political party officials and media advisors are too common to be notable? Bearian (talk) 16:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to List of Teen Titans Go! episodes. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Night Begins to Shine (Teen Titans Go!)

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

No evidence of notability for these episodes together, better covered at main articles Indagate (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Entertainment. Indagate (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources seem to show this is notable enough. https://www.cbr.com/teen-titans-go-ber-night-begins-shine/ ; https://www.wbur.org/npr/545906301/an-accidental-hit-begins-to-shine-and-only-because-of-teen-titans-go ; https://www.dcplanet.fr/220502-decouvrez-funko-pop-teen-titans-go-version-the-night-begins-to-shine ; https://tvsourcemagazine.com/2020/07/review-teen-titans-go-the-night-begins-to-shine-2/ ; https://meiobit.com/371129/jovens-titas-the-night-begins-to-shine-cancao-incluida-em-biblioteca-virou-um-sucesso-entre-os-fas-warner-capitalizando-em-cima/ ;https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/08/the-fall-out-boy-music-video-for-teen-titans-go-redeems-that-horrible-ghostbusters-song/ etc -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lets take a look:
1. CBR: WP:VALNET
2. WBUR: Local NPR affiliate, pretty plot based but does have some COV. if its SIG? meh
3. DCPlanet: Seems to be nothing more than a Funko pop annoucenemnt. I also question the relability of such a source.
4. TVSource Magazine: pretty good but once again questionable source.
5. Meiobit: Questionable reliability but otherwise okay.
6. Konatku: 3 surface level paragraphs.
In conclusion Weak Keep or redirect to List of Teen Titans Go! episodes Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:21, 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) 10:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: to the episode list as suggested. Apart from the NPR link, the rest aren't helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 14:58, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Teen Titans Go! episodes per Olifanofmrtennant's source analysis. I think the NPR article is fairly sustainable but the others are questionable in reliability. Conyo14 (talk) 23:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per OlifanofmrTennant. The song has its own notability independent of the cartoon. Svartner (talk) 20:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article for the song is at The Night Begins to Shine, that's not nominated. Indagate (talk) 21:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that this AfD is for the ten episodes, not for the B.E.R. song.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Harold Ray Presley

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Biography of a sheriff who died in a shoot out with no lasting effect. I thought perhaps their early involvement in the D.A.R.E program might add to notability, however it appears that their participation was at the local level only. I'm not seeing how the article meets Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator Withdraw due to the substantial work done by Cielquiparle. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Mississippi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Military. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GNG. @Ponyo: The story of Harold Ray Presley is huge (during his life as well as after his death) – there are tons of sources and while I've started the expansion, it's going to take a while to do it justice. You could not make up the twists and turns (there is more to follow). There is even a podcast series which possibly explains the huge interest in this article. Are you sure about this? Cielquiparle (talk) 07:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cielquiparle: If you continue to improve the article that would be fantastic, though at this point it still looks like a the majority of the sourcing is local, from the time he became sheriff or his death , and notes his family connection to Elvis Presley. Happy to withdraw the AfD prematurely if wider and WP:LASTING coverage is demonstrated.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 09:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GNG. Sufficient coverage exists in reliable sources. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Uncle Bonsai. The nominator didn't suggest a Merge but a Redirect. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow Tail Records

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to the band Uncle Bonsai, as both it and Yellow Tail Records were founded by Andrew Ratshin ([12]). toweli (talk) 17:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, United States of America, and Washington. toweli (talk) 17:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as the nominator has suggested; this can be speedy closed, as it's the nominator's own suggestion and merges can be handled via WP:MERGE. Chubbles (talk) 15:14, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:56, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nikola Đokić

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

Despite having a brief career at the professional level, I am unable to find any significant coverage in any language. No evidence of WP:SPORTBASIC. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Serbia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 07:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no indication of notability. Geschichte (talk) 18:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Mirza Abbas. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Afroza Abbas

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

Lack independent sources to establish notability, fails WP:GNG. Not a member of any legislative body, fails WP:NPOL. TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Bangladesh. TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mirza Abbas as ATD. Mccapra (talk) 22:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mirza Abbas as suggested. Being the chair woman of a political party entity is not automatically notable, nor is being notable inherited by marriage, short of being First Lady or similar position. Bearian (talk) 16:26, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep‎. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 (t • c) 20:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mutual majority criterion

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG—lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. A search for "Mutual majority criterion" in Google scholar reveals 2 papers, both by the same author, and both substantially post-dating this page (making it a potential WP:CITOGENESIS incident). – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to either proportionality for solid coalitions or solid coalition. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.

Firstly, you are actually just completely incorrect when it comes to claiming that this is a WP:CITOGENESIS incident. Looking at the article's history, anyone can see that the article was first made in 2005. The first citation listed on this article was published in 2004. So that is irrelevant. Doing my own quick search on Google scholar, I was easily able to find more than 2 papers referring to mutual majority as seen here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0005117918080106, https://people.cs.rutgers.edu/~lirong.xia/COMSOC18/papers/COMSOC2018_paper_33.pdf, https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1988-13822-001 and https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329032503_Measuring_Majority_Power_and_Veto_Power_of_Voting_Rules. So you're wrong on that count as well.

But that's not even really getting to the crux of the issue. As I noted on the Talk Page for mutual majority, you have been trying to replace this entire article with a redirect to the page for Proportionality for Solid Coalitions. Whilst it is true that proportionality of solid coalitions is essentially identical to mutual majority in the single-winner case, this is not very apparent from the latter page, and even if so, would essentially be akin to deleting the page for Approval and replacing it with a redirect to Phragmen's rules, just because Phragmen reduces to approval in the single-winner sense. It would unneccesarily get rid of the distinction between a single-winner rule and a proportional representation rule, something which has been carefully established on the other articles on electoral systems. Which leads me to my next reason to oppose this.

This would be a deeply damaging move for the many, many electoral systems articles on here that have the mutual majority criteria listed on them, such as the Comparison of voting rules, ranked pairs, Schulze method, Nanson's method, Tideman's Alternative method, Copeland's method, Kemeny-Young method, instant runoff, and Bucklin method, etc. All of these are single winner methods, and once you have completed your attempt to redirect mutual majority to Proportionality of Solid coalitions, since it would then appear as though they pass a criteria for proportional representation, that would result in readers of Wikipedia being misinformed that these methods are proportional representation methods, which none of them are.

180 Degree Open Angedre (talk) 17:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

also oppose. and I think a topic ban for @Closed Limelike Curves should be seriously considered. it has become clear (at least to me) that this user does not have any academic training or professional experience in the field of social choice, and rather gets their information from amateur reform-enthusiast communities around the web.

While I am glad those communities exist, and I am glad that this user has found a home in them, they are simply not suitable as sources of reliable technical information (or in this particular case, as benchmarks for notability) Affinepplan (talk) 17:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This was explicitly discussed, called "Majority" and distinguished from the proportional case for multiple seats, by Woodall 1999 "Monotonicity of single-seat preferential election rules", so the nominator's citogenesis claim, the main argument for deletion, is bogus. As for the rest, it appears to be part of an idiosyncratic campaign of distortion of election rules by the nominator that has been causing widespread disruption across our voting system articles (see also: Talk:Instant-runoff voting; Template:Did you know nominations/Highest averages method) to the point where it may not be premature to discuss a topic ban. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand there are self-published papers talking about this concept from 1999-2004, but the earliest reference I found to this in something that would qualify as a reliable source comes from 2018 (the two papers by Kondratev I mentioned). – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 18:53, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking up the paper that @David Eppstein: referenced, I could very easily find that it was not "self-published", but actually appeared in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Discrete Applied Mathematics in the 1990s: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166218X9600100X 180 Degree Open Angedre (talk) 19:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, thank you, I wasn't aware of that paper. I'll add it to the article. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 19:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sorry for the confusion, I assumed (I guess incorrectly) that anyone participating in this discussion would (if interested) be able to find the full metadata for that publication from the shorthand reference I provided. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for James Green-Armytage's 2004 paper, Voting matters is described as "a peer-reviewed academic journal whose purpose is 'to advance the understanding of preferential voting systems'. Not what I would call WP:SPS. Wotwotwoot (talk) 19:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it ends up coming to that, I think that the topic should probably be on Electoral systems. 180 Degree Open Angedre (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The concept's presence in peer-reviewed literature predates the article, as noted above, so citogenesis is not a real concern. The suggested merge targets are uncompelling. (It's possible that we have a lot of small pages about voting systems that should all be merged into a bigger article about how voting systems are evaluated, but that discussion is out of scope here.) XOR'easter (talk) 19:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I basically agree with XOR'easter on this one. Maybe a more structural change is in order, or some duplicate material could be gathered in one location instead of being distributed over many articles, but starting it off by redirecting or deleting an article about a referenced concept isn't the way to do it. Wotwotwoot (talk) 19:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I think we can close as keep. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 20:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, consider following the instructors at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Procedure for non-administrator close (nominator withdrawal) McYeee (talk) 20:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to List of Playboy Playmates of 1995#February. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Marie Scott

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

Nothing besides the Playboy 1995 pictorial itself and a couple of primary sources. Tagged for lack of sources almost fifteen years ago, at a time when articles were posted up rather nonchalantly. -The Gnome (talk) 14:37, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Well, the Playboy link is gone. Even if we assume it was substantial, that's all there is for sourcing. I can't find anything about this individual. Adult Film Base and her website aren't useful for sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 14:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:08, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Florida. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Japan, California, Hawaii, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:37, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - to List of Playboy Playmates of 1995. Article does not meet WP:GNG. Demt1298 (talk) 20:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 15:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Playboy Playmates of 1995: Per Demt, I could not find any additional usable sourcing. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 15:55, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Playboy Playmates of 1995#February seems like an excellent solution since that is the main thing she is known for. ProQuest mainly turns up passing mentions like the Journal of Popular Culture article, "Tough Women in the Unlikeliest of Places: The Unexpected Toughness of the Playboy Playmate". Additional sources found can be added to the target article. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Three 6 Mafia. Seeing as the article is a BLP with poor sourcing, and it spent most of its life as a redirect, per the previous AfD, the limited participation this time is enough to prompt me to revert it to the redirect. Owen× ☎ 17:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Crunchy Black

AfDs for this article:

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

Originally redirected to Three 6 Mafia at AfD all the way back in 2011, there is indeed not enough coverage here for a standalone BLP. Independent coverage is limited to a report of an injury and a separate legal issue by two gossip sources that should not be used on BLPs, an ASCAP credit to verify his real name (reliable for that purpose, but does not establish notability), a low-quality biography that looks like the product of a content farm (source 6), a list of songs the subject has contributed to (source 7), a one-sentence AllMusic biography, and a link to an Apple Music listing. The only valuable source is 4, which is about Three 6 Mafia, precisely where this article should be redirected to. No evidence of independent notability to pass WP:NMUSICBIO, by all rights should have stayed a redirect especially given the BLP problems present on the page. JeffSpaceman (talk) 14:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:37, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Three 6 Mafia as before. Since last time, his individual notability outside of that group has not grown, as he has a few guest appearances and several solo releases that were ignored. The only difference in his story over recent years is a steadily growing arrest record, and that's not notable either. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Closing per WP:SNOW (and the only conceivable merge/redirect target is currently oversighted and blacklocked -- we are in some truly grim days of the WWW). jp×g 🗯️ 14:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Navin Chawla (judge)

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

No WP:SIGCOV for the subject. In this refbombed blp, leaving aside the primary sources [13],[14] all the rest are trivial mentions.

In the discussion with one of the user on the talk page of the article, ~~they~~ I argue that

1) Verbatim quotations reproduced without any independent commentary from the reliable source, does not qualify sigcov criteria.

2) ~~They~~ I also argue that the SNG WP:JUDGE which presumes notability is not a valid argument to make, when the guideline says meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. Also, the presumption does not hold if challenged by other editor. The guideline says topics which pass an SNG are presumed to merit an article, though articles which pass an SNG or the GNG may still be deleted or merged into another article, especially if adequate sourcing or significant coverage cannot be found, or if the topic is not suitable for an encyclopedia

Imo, the only contention that needs resolving is whether verbatim quotations from the article's subject qualify as sigcov. If they do, we could have perhaps an

both of which wouldn't qualify WP:NLIST. Judges in India usually maintain a low-profile and media attention that the article's subject has received (partly due to wikipedia's circular reporting in Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation) is not an attention-seeking behaviour as per WP:LPI. — hako9 (talk) 13:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Delhi. — hako9 (talk) 13:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there is no coverage about the judge himself, only cases he has covered. Hemiauchenia (talk) 14:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Bus driver drive busses. Judges judge cases. Without secondary coverage, neither is inherently notable. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If we had a large number of articles about a bus driver's driving they would be notable... We also seem to have secondary coverage (that is we have sources talking about what other sources said about the subject) Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I think we're over the WP:GNG line into notability... Extended coverage of their legal opinions are as much significant coverage as extended discussions of anyone elses opinions. They don't somehow not count because the subject is a judge, there is no negative part of that notability standard. I don't buy the WP:LPI argument, they don't appear to meet the criteria as laid out. I would also note that the article currently only incorporates english language sources, likely there is coverage in other languages which can still be presumed to exist. I would also note that OP's opening statement is more than a little unorthodox, "Imo, the only contention that needs resolving is whether verbatim quotations from the article's subject qualify as sigcov" is just plain misleading because thats just not an accurate description of the coverage we have and you can't misrepresent the views of others like that (I think I'm the user they're trying to call out, but I didn't argue either of those things they're red herring). Hako9 also chose not to notify the other users they mentioned in the OP of this discussion. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended coverage of their legal opinions are as much significant coverage as extended discussions of anyone elses opinions what does extended coverage mean for you? Verbatim reproduction of oral arguments made by a judge during a court proceeding is the job of a court stenographer. The secondary reliable sources that have reproduced the quotes have not published their articles with the judge in mind. They published those because they are following the case. And once again try to not make ridiculous arguments like Wikipedia:But there must be sources!, and waste other editors' time. You insert yourself in discussions about topics which are out of your depth, and you try to make a lazy argument that there are sources but I just can't find them. Doesn't work. And explain how I misrepresented your views. — hako9 (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources go well beyond just verbatim reproduction of oral arguments made by a judge during a court proceeding, they also talk about the impact of the judge's rulings and have third parties who offer their opinion on the arguments and/or their impact. It misrepresents my arguments because I neither argue that verbatim quotations reproduced without any independent commentary from the reliable source, does qualify sigcov criteria or that the SNG WP:JUDGE which presumes notability is a valid argument to make Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources go well beyond just verbatim reproduction of oral arguments made by a judge during a court proceeding, they also talk about the impact of the judge's rulings and have third parties who offer their opinion on the arguments and/or their impact They don't. — hako9 (talk) 17:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greco, Albert (2024). "The Impact of Legal, Intellectual Property, and Copyright Infringement Issues: 2000–2022". The Strategic Marketing of Science, Technology, and Medical Journals. Palgrave Macmillan. (wplibrary) Blocking Sci-Hub
"Delhi HC asks Google, X to remove posts against Om Birla's daughter". The Indian Express. July 24, 2024.
"Shankaracharya sues Govindananda Saraswati for calling him 'fake baba'; Delhi HC responds". Hindustan Times. August 13, 2024.

fiveby(zero) 17:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reproducing the relevant bit However, by 2021, international concerns about Sci-Hub’s illegal activities became more intense, including a major litigation against Sci Hub in India, initiated by ACS, Elsevier, and Wiley, which triggered Sci-Hub to stop illegal downloads onto the Sci-Hub website.52 While the U.S. lawsuits posed some threats to Sci-Hub’s reputation, no financial payments were ever made by Sci-Hub to any of the plaintiffs. However, the litigation in India posed an exceptionally serious threat to Sci-Hub; and, for the first time, Sci-Hub decided to mount a serious defense before the Delhi High Court’s Justice Navin Chawla. Sci-Hub was concerned that its services could be blocked in India.53 This prompted Elbakyan to submit a written appeal to the High Court. A number of prominent Indian scholars supported keeping Sci-Hub on line; and they insisted that the loss of Sci-Hub would pose a serious burden on academics and students since blocking Sci-Hub would have a dramatic impact on scholar ship and research.54 However, Justice Chawla pointed out that Elbakyan’s written appeal to the High Court indicated clearly that Sci-Hub had “unequivocally admitted” to copyright infringement; and the Court ruled against Sci-Hub and the other defendants. Therefore, access to Sci-Hub in India was blocked.

Is this significant coverage of Chawla, according to you? I don't think so. Quite noteworthy for an article on the Sci-Hub case though. — hako9 (talk) 17:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is similar to the run of the mill coverage in the dozen other sources cited. — hako9 (talk) 17:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With ATG right now, but looking. Your nomination is offensive. It's not an uncontrollable itch. fiveby(zero) 17:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could be my shitty sense of humor. — hako9 (talk) 17:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this what can one learn about Judge Chawla from any of these articles, except a) He heard X case b) He made Y decision. — hako9 (talk) 17:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That it? WP cant inform anyone with that article is probably true tho. fiveby(zero) 18:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is trivia. Not significant coverage. — hako9 (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the HT article syndicated from ANI, is another in the long list of sources for which the only use in the context of the article in discussion, is making a list of cases where the subject presided over. So its not sigcov. — hako9 (talk) 18:44, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liked the quote, it's covered elsewhere. They are political cases and best leads i saw for finding something. Everyone understands the point you keep making. fiveby(zero) 15:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been mentioned in Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF)#The Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation situation. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:26, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not SIGCOV; Wikipedia's purpose is for noegenesis, not for infantile attempts to pester people you may harbour a dislike towards. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the uncontrollable itch that one could have when they have shit stuck up in their ass and there's no toilet paper. Is there some reason you're so rude and crude in your nomination? Please reword. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think hako9 is annoyed because he thinks people are creating Wikipedia articles for the deliberate purpose of antagonizing the judge in the ongoing WMF vs ANI case, even when they aren't justified by sources. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then he should AGF... It appears that if the judge is notable they became so as a result of the coverage around that case so its a bit of a chicken and egg situation... I would also note that we have hundreds of pages for Indian judges which are less well sourced than this one, Jyoti Singh (judge) for example has almost the exact same experience, rank, and education as Chawla. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A user as experienced as you should know that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument at AfD. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:43, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did not say it was notable because of that, I noted the apparent state of consensus. Do you have any comment on AGF and the chicken and egg nature of the alledged notability? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yea we have plenty of articles that need to be trashed. Fortunately, we have a place called afd. — hako9 (talk) 20:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for rewording. I appreciate it. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete Per Traumnovelle and ATG. Horse Eye's Back point is persuasive, however coverage thus far were about the cases, not the judge as a person. I would however consider otherwise if there are sources that studied his rulings. – robertsky (talk) 00:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - It appears that India's mainstream media — to avoid facing contempt of Court or otherwise — is reluctant to profile Judges; there is nothing even on Judges who have been appointed to the Supreme Court of India. I am sympathetic to HEB's argument but feel that the existing coverage is singularly about the cases, not the Judge. TrangaBellam (talk) 04:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The sources either mention him in passing or quote his rulings; neither qualifies as SIGCOV. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mike Christie, what would you consider significant coverage for a judge? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 13:23, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Articles in reliable sources that focused either on the judge himself -- his biography, education, and so on -- or his rulings as a whole, characterizing his judgements in some way. Those would be treating him as the subject of the source. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:03, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Saying that they need to be treated as the subject of the source seems to go beyond the guideline which says that "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." although I respect that where that line actually falls is a matter of personal judgement. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right of course, and in fact I had a slightly longer post originally, with parentheticals "(or at least parts of sources)" to make the point that I don't think that standard is met. I trimmed it thinking I was being unnecessarily wordy. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This page is created on 15-10-2021 [15] appears to be a reaction to recent events that have angered judges and may be related to a pending legal case. The sources cited on the page are outdated, suggesting that the page may have been created earlier but only published now. This timing raises concerns about its potential impact on the legal proceedings and violates Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons (WP:BLP). — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZandraBlaese (talk • contribs) 10:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC) — ZandraBlaese (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
15-10-2021, 2024 you meant? – robertsky (talk) 12:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per ATG and TrangaBellam. One would have thought there would be something here for this level tho. fiveby(zero) 15:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC) Keep, since i guess we're abandoning principles here. fiveby(zero) 05:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's easy to post anonymously (we hope) on the internet and praise freedom, but external events can have serious consequences for some and removing public information about contributors for a period is probably a wise procedure. The article and talk page have been deleted and all edits, edit summaries, and user names have been suppressed so even administrators are unable to view them. Whether or not we agree with that action, a keep vote based on it is not valid. Johnuniq (talk) 07:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not invalid, it's irrelevant. Not the closer's or the communities anymore (which would have been the right one). So why do you care how i vote? fiveby(zero) 08:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Delhi High Court, where the subject is mentioned, per WP:ATD. I find this to be a close case, as WP:JUDGE would apply if this was a national or state-level high court, and the court is itself a constitutional body in its country. However, I think this is more akin to an intermediate appellate court due to the Supreme Court of India having appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by this court. BD2412 T 01:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, so it's not a state, it's a Union territory. Live and learn. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SCI has appellate jurisdiction over all state-level High Courts in India. That's a nonsensical reason. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Reliable sources mention the judge in connection with legal cases. Even if a case satisfies WP:N, that is not inherited by the person who happens to be judging the case. Johnuniq (talk) 02:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Current events may result in more significant coverage down the line, but it's not there yet. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 07:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: The role of a judge is inherently tied to the cases they preside over and the judgments they deliver. And the notability guideline on SIGCOV does not mention that the coverage must focus on personal life or background, so coverage of rulings and judgments should be equally valid. Per Rjjiii’s comment, I believe we will have more coverage once the case is over. With this in mind, would those supporting deletion consider switching to draftify instead? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging AndyTheGrump, Hemiauchenia, Traumnovelle, Hako9, Robertsky, TrangaBellam, Mike Christie, ZandraBlaese, BD2412, Johnuniq, Rjjiii, GrabUp. Kindly ignore the ping if you are not interested in changing your stance. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the circumstances I think deletion is preferable. Undeletion can always be requested later, you could also make a copy of it in a text file too. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I have no objection to draftification, but the link should still be a redirect, as a valid redirect target clearly exists. BD2412 T 12:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I was also considering writing this article a few days ago, but while searching for SIGCOV sources, I only found coverage related to cases that are not truly SIGCOV. I would have created it as a pass under WP:JUDGE if the subject were a Chief Justice of that court. However, the current sourcing does not establish notability; the subject fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. GrabUp - Talk 08:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 13:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bench Warmer International

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

There doesn't appear to be enough coverage of the subject for it to meet WP:NCORP. toweli (talk) 12:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Companies, United States of America, and California. toweli (talk) 12:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I found a couple passing references (single sentences saying so-and-so had appeared on one of their cards) but nothing close to WP:SIGCOV. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 17:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No significant coverage whatsoever. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎ per WP:SNOW. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Joseph Williams (singer)

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

Unsourced BLP. Was previously PRODed (then the PROD removed by a LTA account), but the reason given there no longer applies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSINGER can't find any significant coverage of him let alone 16 awards. Theroadislong (talk) 13:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note please see SPI Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Japansonglove for details about the ongoing article/disambiguation page hijack for articles with similar names. Those new accounts should be reported to the SPI case and revert edits to the article. It's hard to tell when I'm on my mobile, I don't know what the original page was, sorry. Knitsey (talk) 13:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSINGER. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 15:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unsourced BLP. Possible hoax content which lacks any verification to back up the claims in the article. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 16:50, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete (WP:CSD#G5) This subject has been the topic of a long term sockepuppeting case (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Japansonglove). I frankly don't understand the page history, as the oldest entry in its history shows a minor edit by Onel5969, a long-time editor in good standing. This must have been a minor edit to something, but there's nothing prior in the page history. In any case, the page should be speedily deleted. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The page was hijacked in October. William Joseph Williams. Now that that is sorted out one can just look at the October edits. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 18:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No evidence of notability. TarnishedPath^talk 06:02, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : No evidence he exists (hoax). David notMD (talk) 08:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was G5 speedy deleted‎. (non-admin closure) Jumpytoo Talk 17:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Lunar New Year Cup

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

Unreferenced article that was copied and pasted from draftspace. Tried doing a WP:BEFORE search, and got nothing. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 12:32, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Hong Kong. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 12:32, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 12:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Owen× ☎ 13:26, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IndiaOne Air

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable airline. I suspect a WP:COI here. Ratnahastin (talk) 11:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, and Gujarat. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Not exactly a valid nomination rationale. There has been no reason given as to why the airline is not notable and no evidence given as to why there might be a conflict of interest. An assertion of non-notability is not enough. See WP:JNN. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check the Twitter profile mentioned on the article creator's userpage.[16] If you believe this subject meets WP:GNG then you can convince me otherwise by showing the sources. Ratnahastin (talk) 12:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My objection is based on the fact that you've provided no evidence to support that the airline is non-notable, simply stating that it's non-notable. If you believe that there is a conflict of interest, you are free to discuss it at WP:COI/N but I don't think this is the appropriate venue to do so. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The Wikilawyering above is unhelpful. Azuredivay (talk) 03:16, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not exactly sure how pointing out that the given rationale isn't exactly valid is a form of "Wikilawyering". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – (Revised vote) – Not a valid rationale. No justification given as to why this airline is non-notable. I have found multiple secondary sources that provide significant coverage of the subject itself such as [17] and [18] which should be enough to satisfy the general notability guideline. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:57, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We need significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Your sources are close to the subject thus they are not helpful. Ratnahastin (talk) 08:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that source #3 is not that independent but I don't see how the 100knots.com source is non-independent. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The airline is one of the scheduled airlines in India. There are numerous secondary sources, such as independent new articles piblished in Hindustan Times, The Indian Express, Outlook India, Financial Express, The Telegraph, and many more. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 13:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Every source mentioned is unreliable per WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEWSORGINDIA mentions that those are unreliable due Paid reporting in Indian news organizations. Kindly state why those news articles are perceived to be paid promotion? If Indian newspapers and channels do not carry the news, then who will. By the loose and sweeping statement of WP:NEWSORGINDIA, ALL newspapers in India are advertisement papers? Is that so? If thats the case, then all WP aritcles that have references / citations to Indian newspapers should be nominated for AfD. Now the real question is, does the airline exist and has scheduled flights OR the effort here is to just delete the article???? Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it says (literally) "Even legitimate Indian news organizations (print, television, and web) intermingle regular news with sponsored content and press release–based write-ups, often with inadequate or no disclosure."--CNMall41 (talk) 18:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Nothing has been offered as far as significant coverage outside of unreliable sources, mainly falling under NEWSORGINDIA. An example would be this from The New Indian Express. Press releases are normally prefaced with the town in which the news comes from (as is this one), and bylined by "Express News Service" as opposed to a bylined source from that publication such as this which shows an author. Same as these sources to name a few that have been presented. No, not all media is paid, but it is churnalism which doesn't fit WP:ORGCRIT. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This would need to pass WP:ORGCRITE, so we need very high quality sourcing. It's really frustrating that this rules out a large amount of local sourcing, but it does. And, I mean no offence to the company when I say this- but they're a regional airline that flies three Cessnas. These sorts of small firms are common, scheduled or not- to merit discussion in a Wikipedia article, the sourcing will really have to be good. And it, unfortunately, isn't currently. I could see that changing in a few years time, however.

Source Analysis

100knots source - appears OK. I'd say it counts. (One)
[19] and [20]- just parrots the founder. Essentially an interview, everything is attributed to him.
[21] doesn't read as blatantly promotional, but it has no author byline. That's not a good sign.
[22] No byline, very promotionally worded. Mentions the subject once in the text, and once in the caption.
Odisha news sources- [23] doesn't mention the company, and while the others do, they're all pretty routine coverage saying that there is now a flight, or that there will be a flight. None of them are very long or in depth enough for WP:ORGCRITE. [24] has no author byline, [25] is just a few sentences of routine coverage, [26] is 50% quotes from the company, [27] has no byline, [28] mentions the company in passing, but is mostly quoting government officials on the flight, talking about the airport, or talking about the weather. It's one of the better sources. (One and a half, I suppose? Two if I'm being generous. I don't like the lack of variety here.)
[29] no author byline, cites everything to unnamed "sources". That's a really bad sign.
[30] is about the airport, mostly. There's really not any mention of the firm, it just briefly dicusses a single flight.
[31] One sentence , not sigcov. Refers only to the airline as "upcoming".
[32] "Ahmedabad-based regional carrier IndiaOne Air will launch operations in a few weeks from Odisha with a fleet of 9-seater Cessna Grand Caravan EX." That's it. Passing mention, not sigcov.
[33] Very short, just says that the company has announced it is hiring.
[34] Passing mention of the company, very little detail on the flight, credits the text to a wire. (This feels very familiar- it might be a duplicate of one of the above sources? I'll have to double check)
[35] About that one singular flight again. No author byline.
[36] About the one flight, no byline

Not doing a source analysis on the company website or the two sources with just a title and no other information. Before didn't turn up anything promising, so we're sort of at two sources that might be okay to base our article off of. That's not enough.

GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 09:25, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Whilst I don't think that the deletion rationale is valid as it is, the lack of significant coverage of the company itself with the majority of sources only having passing mentions of the subject, along with the source review presented above demonstrates that for now, the airline – IndiaOne Air – isn't notable enough for a standalone article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:27, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Owen× ☎ 13:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marián Bochnovič

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

Having an international appearance is no longer a free pass and Bochnovič needs to meet WP:GNG only in order for this article to be kept. I've checked corresponding Wikipedia articles in other languages, especially the Slovak one which would help copy over, but none of them provide enough significant coverage for him. I only find SME, but one source is not sufficient. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there is also this. Capped played, league champion, played in the Champions League group stage - this was during the 1990s. This builds on a quote, but nonetheless points to him being a "club legend" at Nitra, still remembered for a bronze medal in the 1988–89 Czechoslovak First League. After retiring from football, there is futsal coverage. Also after retiring, he was the manager of KFC Kalná nad Hronom (desribed as having had a "rich and successful" playing career) until he went to Slovan Bratislava's academy; has also been assistant coach of Slovakia U17, can better sources about the latter jobs be found? Geschichte (talk) 21:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources analysis: 1. Paywalled interview; 2. Database; 3. GNG requires someone else to write about the person not Bochnovič talking about himself; 4 and 5 are routine manager announcements; 6. Match report in a primary source.

None of those indicate significant coverage that are required for WP:GNG.

⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Geschichte, article certainly needs improving, but the lack of doesn't negate notability. Govvy (talk) 13:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Geschichte. Giant Snowman 07:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per Geschichte excellent search. Svartner (talk) 19:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 11:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David S. Feldman

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

No independent source which discuss in depth about subject, fails WP:GNG, doesn’t received any prestigious award. TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. TheSlumPanda (talk) 11:11, 19 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)} 12:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Almost all the provided sources are primary. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 09:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. No consensus to delete the article currently, after minimal participation from the community in 3 weeks. It can be revisted in a later date if and when a need arises for a clearer consensus. In the meantime, the sources produced can be analysed and can be incorporated into the article if found significant. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leslie Controls

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

Fails WP:NCORP. None of the references here or in a WP:BEFORE hold up to WP:ORGCRIT. CNMall41 (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Florida. Shellwood (talk) 20:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Florida. CNMall41 (talk) 20:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I didn't know about independent sources when I created this, but I have other ways to find these sources now that I didn't know about then. And there have been major changes since this was nominated. There is potential.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vchimpanzee:,Thanks for sharing. I will take another look if you can provide the sources you feel meet WP:ORGCRIT. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found some sources that you probably can't access, but you can see there may be better sources now. A Google search at least got me a bunch of sources about the bankruptcy and I chose the best. I hope they all passed muster. One was The Wall Street Journal but I was only able to see part of the article. It was the important part. After that I tried ProQuest with the information that I had sourced to the company's own web site.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. What I am asking is if you can point out the specific sources that meet the criteria found in WP:ORGCRIT? The ones you found doing those searches? I have access to a lot but cannot find any that do. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stengle, Bernice (November 26, 1987). "Full Steam Ahead: Leslie Controls makes valves to keep ships moving and whistles blowing". St. Petersburg Times. p. 12B.

"Leslie Controls seeks bankruptcy for asbestos claims". non-paywalled copy on Business Insurance. July 12, 2020. Retrieved October 9, 2024 – via Bloomberg News.

Stengle, Bernice (February 20, 1989). "Workers sell Leslie Controls to raise capital and shed debt". St. Petersburg Times. p. 19.

Doss, Kristina (October 29, 2010). "Circor's Leslie Controls Wins Bankruptcy Court Approval Of Plan". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved October 9, 2024.

Kahn, Fareha (April 28, 2011). "Circor's unit emerges from bankruptcy protection". Reuters. Retrieved October 9, 2024.

The last two you should be able to access, although much of the Wall Street Journal source is not accessible to me unless I can find some way to do it through the library. I forgot to do that this morning when I was there.

And if you're not satisfied with these for any reason, I don't know what to say. I've heard people object to coverage in a local paper but the amount of detail seems to be sufficient. I'm hoping ProQuest or other sources can help me with some of the details that came from the company's web site.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.newspapers.com/image/528085231/?match=1&clipping_id=156901759 This looks better and mentions an award. I found another article but it feels like a press release and at this point I don't think it will help.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the reference "Workers sell Leslie Controls to raise..." I searched archives and cannot locate the reference. I searched by title, author, company name, and even went to the specific date and page number and there is nothing on that page similar to what is cited. Can you provide a link to where you accessed it?--CNMall41 (talk) 22:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind that I added the links. I do not like to change anyone's comments but think they would be better inline as opposed to me duplicating everything. I also found this which may explain why there was a reference in New Jersey (the last one you cited above that mentions an award) and outside of Florida. Although I am not sure the award contributes towards notability. I am still looking deeper for more so voters can evaluate as a whole. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.proquest.com/docview/262637776/D0E8E0FD145D41C8PQ/1?accountid=14020&sourcetype=Newspapers The information with it makes a point of the fact it is in the city edition.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I went through the sources provided and also dug through Newspapers.com, Google News, Google Books again to see if I missed something. This seems to be the only reference that would meet WP:ORGCRIT in my opinion. There are a lot of mentions, routine announcements, employment advertisements, etc., but even these are all regional. I also searched more about its parent company (Circor International) and believe this may be notable. Outside of the coverage, it was publicly traded and even the bankruptcy sources for Leslie Controls is related to the parent (references I find on Circor state that the bankruptcy was to shield Ciror from asbestos litigation it was facing. So while I still do not believe Leslie meets the threshold, I am open to seeing if others would agree Circor is and if a merge into a new page for that company would be a good WP:ATD. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only problem at this point is whether the sources are independent or from news sources that are not local. Nevertheless, I keep finding sources that to me establish notability. The statements made in these sources certainly made the company look notable whether or not anyone has done the kind of very specific coverage Wikipedia seems to be looking for. And there's too much detail now to make this part of Circor's article.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I get that the company saying these details are significant is a problem but don't know how you determine that the company's accomplishments are significant. Newspapers or magazines might have said so many years ago. I can't paraphrase some of the more complicated scientific accomplishments but they certainly look important.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your point of view. The company seems important to me as well for what they have done. However, we need to look at WP:NCORP standards and I feel they fall short. The "too much detail" could be removed and it summarized in a paragraph under a page for Circor (assuming it is notable - I may wind up creating it anyway after doing so digging to determine if it is or not). At least for now it seems more notable than Leslie Controls. I think best to let others opine in this discussion about Leslie to determine their take on the references meeting WP:ORGCRIT. For the record, they are coverage quite a bit but mainly brief mentions or routine announcements. Regardless of the year, I feel there would be more WP:CORPDEPTH if they were found to be worthy of notice. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:31, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "too much detail" though is what makes the company significant.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:38, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is disagreement here. The application of WP:NCORP. It is not about how much a company has accomplished, it is about what sources have said about those accomplishments. The [{WP:CORPDEPTH]] simply isn't here. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is enough depth here except the minute I saw the statement that each employee at the dinner received a history of the company, I knew they just repeated what was there. So the only issue is independent reporting on those facts which might have taken place earlier and we just can't find it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it would help but I found this which explains the significance of Leslie train horns. That was the reason I created the article in the first place and someone took that out for some reason. The sources aren't what Wikipedia would call ideal, but I didn't know back then.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:20, 11 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) 20:44, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further input from other editors, as to the above good-faith discussion between the nominator and Vchimpanzee, would be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. ✗plicit 11:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Kabrhel

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

I have been unable to find significant coverage of this poker player outside of the stories about his alleged cheating and the alleged investigation into it. The stories from PokerNews are all routine coverage of his winnings/participation in tournaments. Being a high-roller is insufficient to establish notability. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Europe, Austria, and Czech Republic. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The most successful and best known Czech poker player with appearance in mainstream TV shows (more here). I quickly found sources like 1, 2 and 3, and I'm sure there will be more (and not only on the Internet). FromCzech (talk) 18:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The sources provided by FromCzech are interviews and profiles which are far from WP:GNG. I thought the stories of the person's participation in tournaments comply with notability guidelines, as long as it exclusively focuses on the subject and is not an interview (see here for example). ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:09, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first source on pokerarena is not interview or profile. The source no. 3 also is not interview or profile. Source no 1. has some coverage of him next to the interview. Forbes may be a profile, but it is reliable independent source. Other source I just found is pokerman. FromCzech (talk) 04:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - one of the most notable active European tournament poker players, with 3 WSOP bracelets, and a handful of well-documented controversial moments. Officially Mr X (talk) 18:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree that being a high-roller doesn't alone merit inclusion but if you are a high roller there's plenty good chances you've won some major tournaments - just as in this case. PsychoticIncall (talk) 14:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Winning tournaments also doesn't establish notability. Dozens of people get bracelets every year. Most of them recieve coverage only in online poker news. This guy has a little coverage outside of poker news for an alleged cheating scandal that seems to have been quietly dropped or forgetten about. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A little bit more input here would be handy.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Now that the AfD is closed, I renamed the page as suggested, to distinguish it from the Indiana TV show of the same name. Owen× ☎ 12:59, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nightmare Theater

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

Fairly new article about a non-notable TV show; created by a new editor. No sources; no formatting. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Utah. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was one of Utah's longest running television shows and was very popular. I will be updating sources. As for formatting I will learn and improve the page. Intergalacticlanguage (talk) 17:09, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I haven't been able to dig up much. There is Television Horror Movie Hosts 68 Vampires, Mad Scientists and Other Denizens of the Late-Night Airwaves Examined and Interviewed that covers the show, but there is no preview available. There's also a whole self-published book The Complete Index to Salt Lake City's Nightmare Theatre which would probably be decent for information, but doesn't contribute to notability. There's this dramatic piece from the Utah Education Network that says someone hanged themselves after watching the program. Other than that, it's just passing mentions like one of my favorite things to do was to curl up with my dad on a Friday night and watch the famed horror movie show starring Sammy Terry (a play on the word cemetery), “Nightmare Theater.” The low-budget series was just scary enough to capture my interest, but not so scary that DCFS needed to be alerted. I'm leaning delete, but I'm willing to wait to see what sources come up. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I meant to include this note. Fischer
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:10, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, consider redirecting title to Sammy Terry If you want to write about a local TV program, you need the sourcing to back up your claim. You also need to show that it has some enduring notability to it. I do not think that the Salt Lake program has that, after doing a search that would have included Utah newspapers from the last 30 years (allowing me to avoid printed titles in TV listings). However, there is a redirect target for this title...out of Indiana, where a show titled Nightmare Theater seems to have enjoyed a 27-year run at WTTV. The SIGCOV is substantial, and we have an article related to it already. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Utah show ran from 1962-1982 continuously. Fairly enduring, twenty years. Documentation noted includes television columns noting its popularity. Intergalacticlanguage (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why wasn’t this drafted so that the creator can be helped, instead of having to defend the page at an Afd, which is pretty stressful? Draft, please, if the creator and other users agree, speedy-draft, if such a thing exists. I don’t think that nominating a new page 20 minutes after it was created was the best approach. ’Not ready for Main space”, sure but explain it and draftify is, if the creator is a newcomer/apparently not very experienced contributor, the most constructive path imv. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:48, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Formatted the page roughly. The claim that it was the longest show in Utah and coverage might be enough to Keep this. If not, redirect and merge (in)to KTVX#History please. Very opposed to deletion.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please note that the Utah TV show in this article is entirely distinct from the Indiana TV show of the same name starring Sammy Terry. The Sammy Terry character was on Indiana TV from 1962 to 1989, occasionally thereafter, continuously makes personal appearances, and still produces web content; Sammy Terry has plenty of reliable sources (print news and at least one book), far beyond what the article currently references. If this article survives, it should be moved to something like Nightmare Theater (Utah), with Nightmare Theater being a redirect to Sammy Terry or a disambiguation page. Vadder (talk) 23:26, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I would agree that, even if enough sourcing demonstrating notability could be found, the Utah show is not the primary topic. The Indiana show has much more material to work with. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 15:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I did the initial page, and I believe Nightmare Theater (Utah) would be the proper title. This would avoid confusion with all the other Nightmare Theater and Theatres out there. While the show was broadcast on a Salt Lake City station, it was received statewide. Intergalacticlanguage (talk) 16:15, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I've added a hatnote to distinguish the two identically named shows. Moving to a better title, if applicable, can be done once the AfD is closed. Those who !voted to redirect to Sammy Terry, please consider amending your suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 06:50, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist per OwenX to see if further input/existing contributors have anything to add.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:26, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Three shows are mentioned as notable on the KCPX (KTVX) page. Hotel Balderdash has its own page. The other two are Fireman Frank and Nightmare Theater. Intergalacticlanguage (talk) 23:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Kudos to Warmonger123 for being forthcoming about his conflict of interest. However, there is a unanimous consensus among the non-COI participants that the sources, both those cited by the article and those mentioned here, do not amount to SIGCOV per NCORP. If and when an editor--preferably non-COI--finds additional sources that meet our notability guidelines, please link to this AfD when submitting your request at WP:REFUND. Owen× ☎ 12:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moonmana

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Wikipedia is not an advertising tool and companies must be significantly mentioned in reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added more links and deleted information about current game in development (which has no notable cites).

The links include top MMO news websites about the release of Ultimate pirates by Gameforge (top MMO publisher in the world):

MMOhuts.com, MMObomb.com, F2P.com, MMOgames.com

These are the biggest and most notable web sites focused on MMO which can post a news about an MMO game release. And they all posted the news. 37.12.106.21 (talk) 14:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't vote, and I don't hide WP:COI, clearly stated it in my profile. But I would like to ask a closing admin, if possible, if decision to deletion is made, to draftify/userfy the page instead. Thank you. Warmonger123 (talk) 20:20, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I originally voted delete as the sources were all user-generated like Play Store listings etc. After new sources where added I withdrew my vote, but now that I have reviewed them I am reinstating it. I encourage Warmonger123 to review Wikipedia:Notability is not inherited, the only sources are "Moonmama releases X game" that are mainly about the game with only passing mentions of Moonmama. Per WP:CORPTRIV articles about product releases are not evidence of notability for a company. The other Yahoo reference is basically a press release, and also isn't evidence per WP:PRSOURCE. I feel like there's not really anything left that indicates notability and I can't find anything else. Also a note that User:Warmonger123 has a WP:COI - check their userpage - so their comments can't really be considered a keep vote (but they are welcome to comment). Molecular Pilot 09:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry. Is Yahoo news an automated aggregator? Which search yields no articles? Warmonger123 (talk) 13:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ, Are you sure all the links lead to user generated content? There are link to the top MMO news sites with news added by the news website editors, not regular users. The only links which lead to user generated content, are the links to the released web games on top portals for web games. To appear in the list of Armor games, you actually can't just submit your game. Armor games should choose your game to be published there and add your game to their portal and you should sign a publishing agreement to do so. This is not just something placed somewhere what any user can do.

Please be more specific. So far, it seems like you didn't check the links and wrote your message just by clicking a random one and made a wrong conclusion. Warmonger123 (talk) 13:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I searched on Google and the only results that appeared where the Google Play Store page, LinkedIn, Facebook, YouTube, official website for the company and there were no results under the "news" tab. I couldn't find anything from Yahoo or those other websites you mentioned. Would you mind linking them? Thanks! :) Molecular Pilot 22:00, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also sorry I thought the other websites in the reference list where just aggregators, if you think that something has to be notable to be listed there I'll trust you because I don't really know much about video games. Molecular Pilot 22:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed some links to avoid confusion and added more links to news sites. You probably see no news in the google search because the news related to the games are old and only googlable together with game titles. MMO games are hard to make and it takes several years to make one. Warmonger123 (talk) 00:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep! The original reference list I saw when I commented on this AfD was concerning because it only linked to Newgrounds, Play Store etc. but these articles you've added seem to demonstrate notability, merely publishing a game does not. I have stricken my comment as I'm not sure if the new sources are reliable. UPDATE: I've reviewed them and are maintaining my delete vote, see above for reasoning. Molecular Pilot 06:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Spain and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am still confused which sources the article creator claims pass WP:NCORP, if they have read the guideline at all. WP:ORGTRIV specifically states that "standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage" are not grounds for an article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to orgtriv, product launch considered as standard notice. If for game development companies we have to consider all product launch sources as standard notices, then all video game companies in wikipedia should be removed because they won't have any notable sources. Give me an example, how your recent article Tharsis (video game) can not be considered for deletion then, which sources are notable there? All sources you provided are either user-generated content (reviews) or, accoridng to orgtriv, are standard notices. Let's then go through all articles in wikipedia about video games and video game development companies and delete them, because all of them rely on sources relared on product launches, which are not notable, right? Warmonger123 (talk) 10:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, I am not here to protect the page no matter what, if you prove it should not be here, let it be deleted. I find wikipedia guidelines quiet blurry, so, let's figure out together where the line is in the fog. Warmonger123 (talk) 10:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added links to game reviews, including to the websites which you used in your articles. Warmonger123 (talk) 05:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added several links to [[Jay_Is_Games]] reviews of Moonmana's games Warmonger123 (talk) 18:25, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The newly added sources still lack significant coverage about the company. They consist of routine coverage and passing mentions. --Mika1h (talk) 09:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Check the article on yahoo, the game launch by Glu and Moonmana is the main topic of the article posted by subsidiary of NASDAQ. Most of the article is covering that, this is not a passing mention.

All articles related to Ultimate pirates are passing mentions about Moonmana, but the main topic is Moonmana's game launch. We have 2 games covered, still not enough for the company page? Warmonger123 (talk) 10:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yahoo article is a press release, not an independent source per WP:PRSOURCE. Also per WP:CORPTRIV, announcements of product launches are not significant coverage. --Mika1h (talk) 10:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I am new in wikipedia and trying to figure out how to understand the rules.

Can you please help me to understand what could be an example of an article in the internet which can pass the rules of wikipedia to make a game developer company eligible to be added to wikipedia? If I go through wikipedia game developers and check their article sources, there is almost no game development company which has sources that fit the criteria. So, following the rules, 90-95% of game developers and games have to be deleted from wikipedia, because the articles rely on press releases, announcements of games (products), paid articles or interviews (not independent), biased game reviews etc.

For example, let's take the developer, which definitely should be in the wikipedia: Don't_Nod

Please check the list of the links the article has and tell me at least one, which doesn't fail WP:NCORP criteria. If I go through the list, I can't find a single link, which can pass the WP:NCORP criteria. But the developer is still there. (And should be IMO). Give me a link I'll tell you which criteria it fails. Warmonger123 (talk) 14:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gamekult's article about the company's financials: [37]. Edge's multi-page studio profile seems substantial: [38], Game Developer's report of a report on mismanagement at the company: [39]. --Mika1h (talk) 15:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. company financials - fails WP:NCORP, falls under Examples of trivial coverage: routine coverage, such as: of annual financial results and earning forecasts

2. Facebook in an unreliable source according to: https://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=&lang=&q=Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Facebook

3. An article about working conditions STJV union claims are not good at "don't nod" according to employees - fails WP:NCORP, see Examples of trivial coverage: coverage of purely local events, incidents, controversies. Warmonger123 (talk) 21:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what do you think? Let's delete "don't nod"? :) Warmonger123 (talk) 21:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - None of the coverage passes WP:ORGCRIT. In fact, the Yahoo article is a press release (Yahoo is one of the many aggregators or press releases from Ciscon, Global News Wire, and others). --CNMall41 (talk) 19:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I didn't know yahoo is an aggregator of press releases. I have remove the link. I have added new links today, including MSN and gamebiz.jp.

Please check the links and tell me if they work. Also please check this link: https://www.mmorpg.com/columns/mmo-launch-spotlight-actual-abandonware-hits-steam-this-week-2000131728

It was there before, but I don't understand which criteria it doesn't meet. Warmonger123 (talk) 21:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note: both Microsoft, Gamebiz.jp and the editor from mmorpg.com decided to highlight the games by themselves, these are not press-releases. Warmonger123 (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, it is not common practice to throw up references that then ask people "if they work." If you believe they are reliable to show notability, you will need to state so along with the reason why. Nothing that I have seen on the page or in a search show notability here. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:23, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have more experience in wikipedia. I am not an expert in journalism, I don't know how to differintiate a press-release from an article, not in all cases. Sometimes it's clear when a company gives a press release and you can see the text is definetely written by the company and is not neutral, sometimes is not obvious. I didn't know Yahoo is an agregator of news, so, I added the link, though it was a news, but you siad it was a press-release and I removed it.

I am 100% sure that news from Microsoft and Mmorpg.com are not press releases. Both are reliable sources, both not brief mentions, both articles dedicated to the company's games, both neutral. 2 links = multiple sources. Warmonger123 (talk) 09:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed links to press-releases (what I think were press-releases) and added more links to game reviews. If it's still not enough coverage for a company, I will make the game pages then. Warmonger123 (talk) 05:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added several links to the company's game reviews Warmonger123 (talk) 20:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"I will make the game pages then" - This is certainly something you are free to do. I just want to make sure you do so if they are notable. I would suggest using the AfC process. Although not required, it may spare some headaches down the road. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:47, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're ignoring my messages about Microsoft news, Gamebiz.jp news, Mmoorpg links, which mention the company and the company's games, as well as game reviews. These are not press releases. If you claim there is no links which pass criteria of WP:ORGCRIT it's your obligation to prove it. Warmonger123 (talk) 20:59, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not ignoring. I chose not to reply as I can only state things so many times before it becomes exhausting. WP:ORGCRIT is the guideline to follow. You keep adding references and then asking if they are good enough. It is up to you to read and understand the guideline and then present reasoning why the references you feel meet ORGCRIT indeed meet ORGCRIT. You stated "I've added several links to the company's game reviews." That's great. State the ones that fall under ORGCRIT to show notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:05, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If a company has released several notable games that have been reviewed or featured by reputable sources such as MSN News, Jay Is Games, gamebiz.jp, MMORPG.com, it may be considered notable.

If you strictly start removing or ignoring links from game development company pages that don't meet Wikipedia:ORGCRIT, you may find yourself in a situation where 90-95% of game development companies would be deleted from Wikipedia. This is because most developers lack links that fully meet all Wikipedia:ORGCRIT criteria. (See my example above with Don't Nod.)"

I can explain in detail:

Game-related coverage: Most links on game development company pages are related to the release, cancellation, or reviews of their games (products). These typically fail Wikipedia's significant coverage (SIGCOV) guideline because the articles focus on the products rather than the company itself.
Financial reports and transactions: Links related to financial statements, forecasts, layoffs, acquisitions, and mergers often fall under trivial coverage, as they do not provide significant, in-depth information about the company.
Interviews: Interviews with founders or employees fail to meet the secondary source requirement, as they are not considered independent or neutral.
Controversies: Controversial topics (e.g., Blizzard's sexual harassment cases, Ubisoft's #MeToo allegations) are usually treated as trivial or sensational coverage rather than substantial corporate analysis.

While it is possible to find original journalistic research that presents a company's history and is not based on interviews with founders or employees, such sources are extremely rare. Most video game companies do not have links that meet all Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

Another category of sources that might meet the criteria are articles covering legal troubles, lawsuits, or trials in detail. However, these are typically only available for large corporations. Medium or smaller companies rarely receive detailed press coverage of their legal issues.

Examples:

Quantic Dream: Almost all links fall under points 1–3, except those related to their legal trials.
Hazelight Studios: A well-known studio, but all links focus on their games, and thus fail WP:CORP
Finally, I reviewed 232 links on the Ubisoft page. Nearly all of them fall under points 1–4.

I have no doubts these companies are significant and should be in Wikipedia. My only doubt is that WP:CORP should be applicable for video game development companies strictly. (Because currently it's impossible to meet the criteria for most of the companies that should be in Wikipedia) Warmonger123 (talk) 08:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I made mistakes adding some links to press releases, but not all of the links were press-releases, I removed press-releases and added new sources which are definitely not press-releases. Warmonger123 (talk) 21:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You say none of the coverage passes Wikipedia:ORGCRIT. I don't agree. I don't believe you checked all the links. I read [[WP:BEFORE]] and it says it's YOUR obligation to check the article sources and history before nominating it for deletion. So if you just come to an article, say "nothing passes - delete" without proofs - it's an act of vandalism. Warmonger123 (talk) 20:49, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously a WP:CIR issue as you are addressing me as if I nominated the page for deletion. You can address my "vandalism" at WP:ANI, which is exactly where I will take it should you not redact the accusation.--CNMall41 (talk) 08:11, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an accusation. In the sentence by "you" I didn't mean to address you. Often "you" is used to refer to people in general rather than addressing a specific individual. By "you" I meant "one"/"someone": So if someone just comes to an article, say "nothing passes - delete" without proofs - it's an act of vandalism. And the sentence contains "if", which means it's conditional. I removed links you addressed as problematic and other links which seem like press-releases. I asked you which problems do you see with the other links I provided, you chose not to respond. My mistake was to expect collaboration and to expect people who mark an article as "Delete" to respond.

I added the article. My goal is either to improve it until it fits the state which allows it to exist, or, to understand it's not possible and then it should be deleted and I have just 7 days to do so. But I would like the article to be treated the same way as other articles about game development companies no matter what of the outcomes it'll face. Warmonger123 (talk) 13:11, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I definitely lack of competence, there is no doubt. I am a newcomer. But I'm learning and would be nice for you to rememberWikipedia:Encourage the newcomers advises not only Criticize newcomers, but also to Respond. Warmonger123 (talk) 13:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I am 100% agree that in the initial state the article had to be marked for deletion and User:Zxcvbnm did the right thing. Now I think the article has been significantly improved and deserves another review. Warmonger123 (talk) 14:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of the new sources - still nada. Please understand that notability cannot be inherited from a company's products. The product itself may be notable, but sources have to talk directly about a company for it to qualify as significant coverage. Significant: "We take an office tour of XYCorp". Insignificant: "XYCorp announces the new SuperPhone".

I guarantee you will be encouraged if you demonstrate you are here to build an encyclopedia and not just to promote one specific company. That means dropping the WP:STICK, letting the article potentially be deleted while accepting it isn't personal, and working on other stuff. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:54, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We take an office tour of XYCorp - may be significant, but will fall under self-promotion, because it involves the company (primary source).

I already tried to create an article about **Zander circuitry** before (this is not my company, just a company that creates great guitar gear). It didn't encourage me as well. It was rejected as well due "not enough notability".

So far I don't understand how any company may appear in wikipedia. The rules are so strict, that almost no company can pass. However, the wikipedia contains thousands of companies, which if you check the links, don't pass the criteria of notability.

I posted a good example above:

Hazelight Studios

The studio, which released a super famous and super successful game (sold over 20mln copies), won multiple awards (even I have the game and love it). But the article about the studio has ONLY links related to the studio's game, and as notability cannot be inherited from the studio games (products) then, according to wikipedia rules, the article about Hazelight Studios should be deleted. So, I don't understand how some studios are better than others, how some studios are allowed to be in wikipedia with links ONLY related to their products, and how some other studios are not allowed? Warmonger123 (talk) 18:18, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Nuclearelement (talk) 20:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ancient city

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

This page is a redirect to article: "King's Field IV". However, it would make more sense to move the article "La Cité antique" over the top of this redirect, and then add disambiguation.

"The Ancient City" is the common English title for French book "La Cité antique". Nuclearelement (talk) 08:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep because of absence of delete rationale, see WP:Speedy keep. Thincat (talk) 09:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep because this is the wrong venue. WP:RFD is for redirects, not AFD. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 17:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Legitimacy of the State of Israel#Rhetoric of delegitimization without prejudice against selective merger that doesn't violate WP:UNDUE or NPOV. As xDanielx correctly pointed out, if the subject is notable, POV can be fixed by editing. However, consensus here is that the subject is either already covered by the proposed target, or can be better covered there, and the current title is unsalvageable as a POV fork, as articulated well by Dclemens1971. Some of the Keep and the Delete !votes were open to such a redirect or merge, so this solution seems the least objectionable. The subject falls under WP:PIA, but thankfully, all participants are XC, so no !vote was discarded. Owen× ☎ 12:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Zionist regime

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

Basically another name for the already deleted Zionist entity article Abo Yemen ✉ 08:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Abo Yemen ✉ 08:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Middle East, Iran, Israel, and Palestine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:50, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nomination. No need for duplicate articles.TH1980 (talk) 00:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the AfD for Zionist entity was unusual, in that there seemed to be a rough consensus that the topic itself was notable, but editors argued for deletion anyway based on neutrality concerns. Neutrality is normally a reason to improve an article rather than delete it. Moreover, neutrality is a property of articles rather than topics. The non-neutrality of a different article is not an argument to delete this one, regardless of the topics' similarity. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 22:27, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nomination. Also somewhat for the reasoning provided in the Zionist entity discussion. seefooddiet (talk) 01:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 01:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it appears be sourced and a real term. I'm open to a merge. Andre🚐 01:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Isreal: ,specifically a section dealing with legitimacy on the world stage. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 03:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination or merge to Zionist entity article. Hogo-2020 (talk) 05:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, since Zionist entity is currently not an article but a redirect to Israel, do you mean delete or redirect to Israel? — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 17:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, delete or redirect to Israel#Rhetoric of delegitimization. Hogo-2020 (talk) 09:51, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - can those supporting deletion explain what the argument is? Deletions are normally decided based on notability, so it's strange that there are zero mentions of notability in delete !votes here, and only one in the related AfD. Unexplained !votes aren't really useful. If the concerns could be articulated, that would give us an opportunity to address them, e.g. by adding additional sources if needed. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 17:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Legitimacy_of_the_State_of_Israel#Rhetoric_of_delegitimization as was done with "Zionist entity." This article has the same WP:NPOV problems as that article did. To address another comment above, a subject can fail WP:GNG even if it is discussed with sigcov in reliable sources because the second part of the GNG is the test of whether a standalone page is needed. In this case, it's not, since this subject is already discussed elsewhere, and this page is a WP:COATRACK for non-neutral perspectives. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for explaining. Yes WP:GNG does leave the door open for other arguments against inclusion in spite of the presumption. Still, the presumption does carry weight, making deletion more difficult to justify. NPOV concerns generally aren't considered a reason for deletion. I think this topic would outgrow the discussions elsewhere (like Legitimacy of the State of Israel) if given the chance to be developed, rather than being deleted at early stage with a prompt AfD. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 01:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The essay you linked says “If a NPOV problem in an article could be solved with simply more editing, then that's not a reason for deletion.” I don’t think more editing will ever make an article entitled “the Zionist regime” sufficiently neutral, and the broader subject matter can be covered better at the redirect target suggested. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why it can't be neutral. We have many articles about loaded and/or politically charged language - see e.g. Category:Political pejoratives.

I'm not even sure what the neutrality concerns would be about the current article? The talk page is empty, and no specific issues have been mentioned here either.

If we're going to have another WP:TNT decision here (which seems extreme especially as a first step), we at least need to understand what issues to avoid the next time a recreation is attempted. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 05:00, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Israel#Rhetoric of delegitimization. It's a name for Israel used by some. Whether for delegitimization or just in denial. gidonb (talk) 23:43, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ray Carver

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

non-notable darts player All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 08:31, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and New Hampshire. Shellwood (talk) 10:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Darts-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:21, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Illinois and Maryland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:02, 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!} 08:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not meeting WP:BIO, all "external links" on the article (there are no references) 404 (or similar) today, only working if archived and are all generated by the subject himself or a database aggregator with minimal criteria for inclusion. Search yields minimal news articles about him specifically (mainly about the results from a tournament he played in) and several listings for a small product he endorsed, not demonstrating notability. Molecular Pilot 09:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. – Joe (talk) 09:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darius Yuen

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

BLP of a successful businessman and philanthropist lacking in depth independent coverage. Non-notable awards, Forbes and routine coverage of career moves. Does not seem notable. Mccapra (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Hong Kong. Mccapra (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a reasonable search for sources turns up nothing substantial. Yes, he got a 1-paragraph mention in a Forbes Asia list, but I can't see how WP:BLP is met, and no other applicable category Oblivy (talk) 09:37, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Tam, Wai-yun 譚蕙芸 (2010-10-25). "金融猛人海嘯「橫財」打貧" [Financial Tycoon Tsunami: 'Windfall' to Fight Poverty.]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2010-10-28. Retrieved 2024-10-08 – via Yahoo! News.
  The article notes: "跳槽前，阮勵欣已是政券界猛人，在法國巴黎銀行任亞洲部主管，曾參與蒙牛、比亞迪、百盛、長城汽車上市活動。後來貝爾斯登與中信證券達成合作協議，邀請他任亞洲部主管，他認為新工作更有挑戰，於是在2008年2月辭職，詎料一個月後新公司股價暴跌，3月14日他在休假時，收到一個震撼的電話。"
  From Google Translate: "Before the jump, Darius Yuen was already a strongman in the political and securities industry, working as head of Asia at BNP Paribas and participating in the listing activities of Mong Kok, BYD, Parkson and Great Wall Motors. Bear Stearns later reached a cooperation agreement with CITIC Securities, inviting him to be head of Asia. He found the new job more challenging, so he resigned in February 2008. He expected the new company's share price to plummet a month later On leave, I received a shocking phone call."
  The article notes: "他鑽研外國經驗，發現了一種名為「創投慈善」（Venture Philanthropy）的社會服務模式，就是按商業邏輯發掘有潛質的社會服務，替他們籌集資金，提供營運意見。如果阮勵欣以前做的是IPO，發掘有潛質的新公司替它們上市，他現在就是推廣SPO（Social Purpose Organization），找尋有社會效益的機構來投資。他的慈善機構名為「心苗」，至今已贊助了數項在亞洲的社會服務。在上海，他們投放了50萬元人民幣，支持一個為建築物料是否符合環保準則作評級的網站；在南亞，他們正研發一部太陽能電腦，讓學生在偏遠村落也可上網學習。"
  From Google Translate: "He drilled into foreign experience and discovered a social service model called Venture Philanthropy, which is to discover potential social services according to business logic, raise funds for them, and provide operational advice. If Darius Yuen used to do IPOs and discover potential new companies to list them, he is now promoting SPOs (Social Purpose Organizations) and looking for socially beneficial institutions to invest in. His charity, called Heart Seedlings, has sponsored several social services in Asia. In Shanghai, they have invested RMB 500,000 to support a website that rates whether buildings are expected to meet environmental criteria, and in South Asia, they are developing a solar-powered computer that will allow students to learn online in remote villages."
2. "一周出差四次兩年未踏九龍" [Four Business Trips in a Week: Two Years Without Setting Foot in Kowloon]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). 2010-10-25. Archived from the original on 2010-10-28. Retrieved 2024-10-08 – via Yahoo! News.
  The article notes: "阮勵欣做了18年投資銀行，他的職業生涯可以用「瘋狂」來形容﹕早上6時半起床，看《華爾街日報》、《金融時報》，午餐晚餐都要見客，其餘時間與各國股市同步呼吸，幸運的話深夜12時可以休息，但間中也會不眠不休2至3天。"
  From Google Translate: "Darius Yuen has been an investment banker for 18 years. His career can be described as "crazy": he gets up at 6:30 in the morning, reads the "Wall Street Journal" and "Financial Times", meets guests for lunch and dinner, and does the rest. Time breathes in sync with the stock markets of various countries. If he was lucky, he would rest at 12 o'clock in the middle of the night, but sometimes he would not sleep for 2 to 3 days."
  The article notes: "阮勵欣9歲離開香港到洛杉磯讀書，在南加州大學會計系畢業後不久，就做銀行家。18年來只關心財經，記者問，香港對你來說是什麼？"
  From Google Translate: "Darius Yuen left Hong Kong at the age of 9 to study in Los Angeles. Shortly after graduating from the accounting department of the University of Southern California, she worked as a banker. In the past 18 years, you have only cared about finance. The reporter asked, what does Hong Kong mean to you?"
3. Tan, Choe Choe (2022-02-14). "After Hong Kong, Sow Asia founder wants to help spur impact investing in Malaysia". The Edge. Archived from the original on 2024-10-08. Retrieved 2024-10-08.
  The article notes: "In 2008, Darius Yuen founded Sow Asia, a Hong Kong-based charitable foundation that has been supporting early-stage social enterprises intent on scaling their social or environmental impact. ... For the remarkable work he did with Sow Asia — which is still going strong — Yuen was honoured as one of Forbes’ Heroes of Philanthropy in 2011, when he was 41. More than a decade after that, success stories such as HK Recycles Ltd, which provides convenient recycling solutions for offices, schools and retail stores, alongside employment to autistic youths, keep him going. ... Yuen, who is managing director and responsible officer of Zhong Yi Investment Managers Ltd, an asset management company that he founded in July 2018 ..."
4. Lam, Lana (2011-08-07). "Happiness is sharing your ideas with others". The South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2024-10-08. Retrieved 2024-10-08.
  The article notes: "Another speaker was venture philanthropist Darius Yuen Lai-yan, 41, a former investment banker with 18 years' experience who turned his back on making millions to give back to the community. He spoke of a 'red line' as the point where we make enough money for our basic needs and then everything above that was simply accumulation of desirables not necessities. Yuen established the Sow (Asia) Foundation which provides seed capital for sustainable projects with a focus on environmental awareness and education in design, construction and manufacturing on the mainland."
5. Waller, Martin (2010-01-21). "Will Kraft's feel for Cadbury clear 2012 hurdle?". The Times. Archived from the original on 2024-10-08. Retrieved 2024-10-08.
  The article notes: "We last came across Darius Yuen when he was about to move from the relatively unscarred BNP Paribas to the doomed Bear Stearns to become head of the equity capital markets group in Asia. Yuen, after “a shift in his own values”, according to his website, tells me that he has now set up the SOW (Asia) Foundation, a Hong Kong-registered charity investing in social entrepreneurs. The first investment is in the producers of a much-needed rating system for building materials in China, which tells architects or whoever how green they are. So proving that some good can emerge out of almost any disaster imaginable."
6. Articles about him resigning from BNP Paribas Capital Asia Pacific to join Bear Stearns in 2008:
  1. Gopalan, Nisha (2008-03-18). "New Bear Hire Has Bad Timing". The Wall Street Journal. ProQuest 2648659969. Archived from the original on 2024-07-24. Retrieved 2024-10-08.
    The article notes: "Hong Kong banker Darius Yuen must be ruing the day he left BNP Paribas after 14 years with the France investment bank and a Hong Kong brokerage house it once acquired. The former co-head of equity capital markets for Asia at BNP Paribas is on leave before taking a similar post at Bear Stearns at the end of May. The announcement of his new job came out Friday in Asia-hours before word of Bear's financial woes began to spread on Wall Street. The idea was that Mr. Yuen eventually would become head of equity capital markets at the Asia joint venture that Bear and China's Citic Securities signed in October."
  2. "Bear Hires New Asia Markets Executive". The New York Times. Reuters. 2008-03-14. ProQuest 2222392115.
    The article notes: "Bear Stearns has hired Darius Yuen from the French bank BNP Paribas to head its equity capital markets group in Asia, a spokeswoman told Reuters on Friday. ... Mr. Yuen will join in May and report to John Moore, who was named Bear’s Asia chief executive in August. He will assume the title of senior managing director and head of equity capital markets for Asia, according to a company spokeswoman, Jessie Hsieh. Mr. Yuen’s background in equity capital markets shows that Bear is eager to seize a greater underwriting presence in the region after initial public offerings surged in China last year. ... Mr. Yuen had been with BNP Paribas and its predecessor, Peregrine Investment, for 14 years, responsible recently for the bank’s ECM franchise in Asia, according to FinanceAsia, which reported the appointment."
  3. Waller, Martin (2008-03-15). "Let us all raise a glass to Darius Yuen - City Diary". The Times. Archived from the original on 2024-10-08. Retrieved 2024-10-08.
    The article notes: "While we are on the subject, let us all raise a glass to Darius Yuen, who until now worked for BNP Paribus in Hong Kong."
  4. "法巴資深賓架過檔貝爾斯登" [Senior Executive at Societe Generale Moves to Bear Stearns]. Hong Kong Economic Times (in Chinese). 2008-03-13. p. A16.
    The article notes: "洋名Darius的阮勵欣，在法巴投資行融資部門任職9年，是次跳槽不知是否參與貝爾斯登和中信證券共同在亞洲大展拳腳的計劃有關。不過老杜聽聞，Darius仍需過冷河3個月後才可上任。早前他與愛妻共同開設一間現代畫廊，相信今次終於可以靜下來，一改投行家忙得團團轉的顛倒生活，與太座共同打理心頭好一段日子。"
    From Google Translate: "Yuen Lai-han, whose foreign name is Darius, has worked in the financing department of BNP Paribas Investment Bank for nine years. It is unknown whether his job change is related to Bear Stearns and CITIC Securities' plan to jointly expand their presence in Asia. However, Lao Du heard that Darius still needs to cross the cold river for three months before taking office. Earlier, he and his beloved wife jointly opened a modern gallery. He believes that this time he can finally calm down, change the busy and upside-down life of an investment banker, and take care of his heart together with his wife for a while."
  5. Bei, Hu (2008-03-12). "Yuen Quits as BNP Asia Equity Capital Markets Co-Head". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on 2024-10-08. Retrieved 2024-10-08.
    The article notes: "Darius Yuen quit as regional co-head of equity capital markets at BNP Paribas Capital Asia Pacific Ltd., the Asian corporate finance unit of BNP Paribas SA, becoming the latest former Peregrine Investment Holdings Ltd. banker to quit the firm. Yuen, 39, left the French bank last week ..."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Darius Yuen to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:56, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources found by Cunard. 1.47.210.41 (talk) 17:06, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Could we get a further review of these sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:23, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment thanks for finding these but IMV they are not in depth coverage. They are a mix of routine sector coverage of who’s been hired and fired, and PR profiles. Mccapra (talk) 08:58, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Darius Yuen received significant coverage in international publications and in 2008, 2010, 2011, and 2022. The sources about his resigning from BNP Paribas Capital Asia Pacific to join Bear Stearns were published in 2008 in international publications.
  In 2010, he received significant coverage in the British publication The Times and the Hong Kong publications Ming Pao and the South China Morning Post about his move to philanthropy. In 2022, he received significant coverage in the Malaysian newspaper The Edge about his philanthropic work and post-banking career. There is enough biographical coverage to pass Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria and Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Cunard (talk) 23:26, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further discussion about the sources presented by Cunard.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 07:53, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

>
Keep It seems to me that @Cunard shows significant, in-depth, independent coverage, enough to pass Wikipedia:Notability. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 00:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Izumi Miyata

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

Failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played 232 minutes in Japan's third league. No significant and independent coverage, including in ja:wiki. Geschichte (talk) 07:13, 12 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) 10:12, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:12, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 14:47, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion as a contested prod.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 07:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 19:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taishin Morikawa

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

Failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played 8 times in Japan's third league. No significant and independent coverage, including in ja:wiki. Creator is globally locked. Geschichte (talk) 07:14, 12 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) 10:13, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:11, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 14:47, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion as a contested prod.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 07:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 19:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Castles and Fortresses of Western Ukraine

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

Not notable, deleted in Ukrainian wikipedia. Шиманський Василь (talk) 06:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: only references are user-generated or in databases which include any published book such as Google Books, Goodreads, National Library of Ukraine etc. Searches for the English and original name reveal no evidence of WP:NOTABILITY. Molecular Pilot 09:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Ukraine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dining rights

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

1. No Sources 2. Does not have notability Sheriff U3 talk 06:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Search for "dining rights uk" only yields a couple alumni pages on specific universities, not indicating WP:NOTABILITY Molecular Pilot 09:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok to delete as the article at the moment lacks citations and appears to be based on original research. No prejudice if the article is completely written in the future citing reliable sources, possibly reframed as the history of dining rights traditions in England (with roots in ancient Greece (?)). If sources are found that discuss it in meaningful depth, that is. JSTOR suggests there may be. Or not. In any case, not a quick fixer-upper. Cielquiparle (talk) 16:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Cielquiparle. I did a search as they did, and found some sources, but this page would have to be started from scratch. Bearian (talk) 16:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:37, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magnet Man

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

promotional..notability in doubt SINGS09 (talk) 03:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Barbados. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Disagree with this nomination, particularly no evidence of a WP:BEFORE. The article does need some cleanup but that's no reason for deletion. There is enough coverage, including of awards and platinum sales, from independent sources to meet WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion 09:43, 5 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!} 02:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources including newspapers and books already referenced in the article that together show a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Matupi Township. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awmsawi

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

PROD'd with the rationale: Could not find a single reliable source that mentions this placename. NGS Names Server doesn't even have it as a "populated place", their wastebasket taxon of geographic names. Searching the coords in Google shows what's maybe a few houses, but without any reliable sources, even a trivial legal recognition, we can't confirm the place meets GEOLAND.

De-PROD'd with the edit summary "deprod; appears to exist; WP:GEOLAND", which completely fails to take into account that I did address GEOLAND in my PROD rationale. "Appears to exist" based on what reliable sources? None, of course, were added. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Myanmar. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete due to failed verification. GMaps shows a village named "Butlang" at the given coordinates; maybe they are the same but without sources there's every reason not to believe this article. Mangoe (talk) 20:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEOLAND. Clearly a recognised settlement. Has three churches, which is unlikely for "maybe a few houses". If you zoom out on the map you will clearly see a village labelled Awm Sawi north of Butlang. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Necrothesp, you say this is "Clearly a recognised settlement". Recognised by what government entity, as required by GEOLAND? What sourcing is this assertion based on? Google maps is not a reliable source. You have been on Wikipedia long enough to know that statements such as these ought to be backed up by referring to reliable sources, so please provide some or strike your comment. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to use common sense. Extremely unpopular with some "rules"-obsessed editors, I know. How can a map that shows a village not be a reliable source? Are you saying Google Maps has put a village there that doesn't actually exist? Because otherwise, that's clearly a village! -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's great, but as you know, Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, not vibes. For all we know, that area is part of Butlang, the named place where its coordinates map to. For all we know, the location there isn't even called Awmsawi, perhaps it's called something else and Google has taken the placename from us in an act of citogenesis. We just don't know, and in the absence of reliable sources to verify the content, we shouldn't have an article. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google only very recently removed the incorrect name it had for a town I grew up near (I ceased sending in reports about it about 15 years ago). The town is in an Anglophone country. I wouldn't trust anything it has to say about Burma without outside evidence. -- asilvering (talk) 03:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Meh. The article is one sentence with some coordinates. The coordinates clearly show an Awmsawi village with local buildings named Awmsawi. I don't know how to do a local search to prove this exists or to even find more information about it considering the non-English script. My hunch is it's eligible for an article but it's not easily proved. SportingFlyer T·C 00:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Matupi Township, where I've added info on Awmsawi being one of the Matupi villages designated "red" by the military according to this news article (though Google just translates it as "M." here). I also found the village (အမ်ဆွေး) in a government list of villages of Mutupi Township -- page 73, third table, third entry under the header (Google somehow translates it as "Am sorry"...). JoelleJay (talk) 19:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happily on board with a redirect, thank you for finding those. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as suggested, or to Chin State. There’s just not enough information to create a stub at this time. Bearian (talk) 16:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Awmsawi seems to also be referred by the name 'Amsoi B' (see GeoNames). Doing a search of this brings up a few things like this PDF which mentions this as a village and this other pdf which shows it on a map.

Additionally, I'm pretty sure that this article on the Burmese Wikipedia corresponds to Awmsawi judging by the co-ordinates. The article says that it was in a census, thus meeting WP:GEOLAND. 122.56.85.105 (talk) 22:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte (talk) 20:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Margaret Preece

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2016. Not clear that the subject meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, or WP:SINGER. 4meter4 (talk) 04:06, 19 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) 04:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: England and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawing per WP:HEY. Cielquiparle has done an amazing job referencing the article, and adding further content. WP:GNG appears to be met. Good work!4meter4 (talk) 16:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Procedural close‎. It doesn't look like this article was ever tagged for an AFD discussion and after a brief period as an article, it has been returned to being a Redirect page. If you want to discuss the redirect, nominate it for WP:RFD Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mutual majority criterion

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

Does not pass WP:GNG. After a deep search for the term on Google Scholar, I only managed to find two primary sources (both by the same author) that use this term; both also substantially postdate this article (2005 article, 2018 papers) which makes me concerned about possible WP:CITOGENESIS. The topic is effectively equivalent to the independence of clones criterion plus majority favorite criterion as well—the criterion just says that if a group of clones is a favorite of the majority of voters, one of them has to win. If we had an article for every pair of criteria like this, it would quickly end up unmanageable.

After an apparent WP:CANVAS incident here, I'm looking to establish a more firm consensus with regard to making this a redirect to proportionality for solid coalitions, which I believe adequately covers this topic. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April Evans

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

Minor concert soprano who appears to mainly work as voice teacher. Her one big credit, the performance with the Opera Orchestra of New York, was as a last minute replacement for a sick singer. The review is not complimentary, stating she sang cleanly but without characterization. She appears to have had a very brief and unremarkable performance career in the 1980s. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 02:35, 19 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) 02:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok to delete. Found several reviews via Newspapers.com which were lukewarm to negative, like this 2004 Star-Ledger review of her performance as Aïda with the Metro Lyric Opera. Does not meet WP:SINGER. Cielquiparle (talk) 18:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ludmilla Azova

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

Fails WP:GNG for lack of significant coverage in independent sources. Further the article contains false information. For example, the New York Philharmonic has a meticulous searchable archive (see https://archives.nyphil.org/index.php/search?search-type=singleFilter&search-text=Ludmilla+Azova&search-dates-from=&search-dates-to=) of every performance given by the orchestra during its entire history. Every soloist is easily searchable and will pop up in a search . She gets zero hits in the archive, and never sang with the orchestra. When I looked at the sources much of the content in the article could not be verified to the cited sources (I have a subscription to The New York Times). I placed tags on material not supported by sources. Very little is actually verifiable. I can find no evidence that she sang in operas other than The Consul in New York, and the part she sang was the tiny role of Anna Gomez who doesn't even get an aria. There are no sources in newspapers or books that I could find to verify the La boheme, Madama Butterfly, and Faust performances. I strongly suspect these are also performances that were made up and never happened. Other than her recital review, there isn't any significant coverage on this singer. Newspaper archives didn't have anything nor did google books. 4meter4 (talk) 01:37, 19 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) 01:37, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I support the nominator's expert investigation into the sources, and have little to add to the convincing analysis. Via Google Books I did find a couple of minor announcements for stage appearances by Ms. Azova in the late 1960s but she was only named briefly in long lists of credits. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Umut Camkiran

AfDs for this article:

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

Declined G4. According to the declining admin, the previous version of the article was more "expansive". Subject is clearly lacking notability, and no reliable sources have been provided. Fails WP:GNG. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:32, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Germany and Turkey. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:32, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Boxing-related deletion discussions. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fight results and database entries do not constitute significant independent coverage. As for WP:NBOX, Camkiran may be the WBC Asian champion, but the WBC currently shows 3 champions and ranks him as the #31 contender after them[40]. That's a long way from meeting the WP:NBOX requirement of a world top 10. Papaursa (talk) 01:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Papaursa. SerialNumber54129 19:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless someone can add references to reliable sources independent of this boxer that devote significant coverage to this boxer. Cullen328 (talk) 05:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Though there is evidently consensus for trimming the list. asilvering (talk) 01:41, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Romansh exonyms

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

Indiscriminate unreferenced list of proper names, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Other such articles have recently been deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French exonyms. toweli (talk) 15:09, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Geography, Lists, Europe, and Switzerland. toweli (talk) 15:09, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTDICT. Azuredivay (talk) 10:11, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is a definition of exonyms given by the UN that means that such lists are not indiscriminate, but instead pass WP:LISTCRITERIA. By all means cull items that should not be there (such as toponyms that are the mere result of orthographic rules in different languages). But such lists themselves are encyclopedic. As for appealing to recent rulings, what's actually happened is that there has been a huge bunch of individual nominations, some closed very quickly, without any notification placed on the page most people interested in the topic would see: Talk:Endonym and exonym.OsFish (talk) 08:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But what makes this specific list wiki-notable? Which reliable sources have provided significant coverage of the topic of Romansch exonyms? I'm not aware of any policy that would presume automatic notability for lists of exonyms. There have been attempts to group exonym articles into one AfD nomination: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of names of European cities in different languages and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afrikaans exonyms. They failed due to the large amount of articles being considered, resulting in no consensus (and some of the articles, such as Chinese exonyms, seem to be notable, due to having been discussed in sources). So, I couldn't have bundled many nominations together, and instead opted for an individual approach. Admittedly, I hadn't considered posting on Talk:Endonym and exonym, fair enough. And I also could've explained my approach, and the reasons for it, in the nominations. toweli (talk) 09:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That a class is well defined is not obviously sufficient. —Tamfang (talk) 01:09, 18 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!} 21:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trim: A few names in the list are evidently not cognate to the respective endonyms, and I'd preserve these. Otherwise, delete as trivial; each language adapts foreign words to its own phonology and orthography, okay, we get it. —Tamfang (talk) 23:58, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:00, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to The Big Bang (2019 film). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lalbijo

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

Fails Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria #3 Creative professionals. All he did was create a short film about a man getting water (no dialogue) and all the sources are about the short film [41]. The feature film he directed did not release yet. A simple Google search yields nothing. WP:TOO EARLY. Redirect to The Big Bang (2019 film)?

I thought this source was about him [42] but it only mentions his name (ലാൽ ബിജോ) four times. DareshMohan (talk) 00:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Advertising, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Big Bang (2019 film): until the other film is released. I am not opposed to Keep as one of the applicable guideline, WP:DIRECTOR indicates that directors of even one notable work can be considered notable. But the said work being a short, in the present case, the redirect suggested by DareshMohan seems to be a fair compromise. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:55, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NDIRECTOR. The director has not made a remarkable or significant achievement, enough to deserve attention. The sources on the page do not have significant coverage on the director himself to pass WP:NBIO. RangersRus (talk) 17:14, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nishikant Dixit

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

No reliable sources in English or Hindi (निशिकांत दीक्षित). All sources are unconfirmed YouTube interviews [43], IWM Buzz [44], India Forums [45], and Telly Chakkar [46], which are all listed as unreliable at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force#Guidelines on sources. This doesn't add anytihng [47]. Might meet WP:NACTOR (30+ small roles) but no reliable sources. DareshMohan (talk) 00:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:11, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Mccapra (talk) 04:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yoko Maria

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

Article contains zero independent sources with significant coverage. The sources used are all self published or from primary materials closely connected to the subject. Fails WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 00:10, 19 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) 00:10, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The article looks like an attempt to prop up a rather average career with exaggerations and flowery prose. She has some concert announcements and recordings, and apparently appeared at Carnegie Hall, but (at least in English) I can find no significant coverage or her career or biography. Also, four concerts in seven years do not constitute a "World Tour". ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:V. Two of the four links are unalived. Bearian (talk) 16:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was procedural keep. AFD is unfortunately not the venue to delete files. (non-admin closure)‎ Geschichte (talk) 20:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Science Council of Japan.svg

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/File:Science Council of Japan.svg

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

Duplicate of c:File:Socj logo.svg. Great Brightstar (talk) 18:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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