Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 20

< October 19 October 21 >
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 keep‎. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 21:54, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shabir Hussain

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

The article does not meet the criteria of WP:BIO. He has received media coverage mainly for being a famous chef without merit to comply with WP:GNG and very few sources Pitille02 (talk) 22:14, 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! 23:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Netpolitik

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

Doesn't seem to be notable topic, nor used by anyone besides it's creator. A Google scholar search nets only obscure papers besides Bollier's book. Plasticwonder (talk) 22:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: It doesn't seem to be a term in common use, and the original paper proposing it was written in 2003, with no rise in currency since then, which is a pretty strong argument against notability. There is one possible 2018 citation, which could suggest more recency and possible engagement by other scholars, but it doesn't say much about the term that could be integrated into the article, more a mention of the fact that the term was coined and an exploration of whether it is catching on or useful, but it's a poorly translated source I'm having trouble understanding. The best other independent citation I could find is a 2005 paper about internet assisted pedagogy in undergraduate course that cites it in a pretty tangential way. That all seems to say not notable to me. penultimate_supper 🚀 (talk) 23:23, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete seems to be a made up word that nobody uses? RachelTensions (talk) 23:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 21:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Israeli massacres in Gaza 2023–2024

[edit]
List of Israeli massacres in Gaza 2023–2024 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't appear to be notable based on the usual WP:NLIST standard. I found this but AA is WP:GUNREL; also this video but reliability is questionable.

Definitions of massacre vary, and this particular list seems to use an unusually broad definition. If we were to pare it down to notable events which are commonly known as massacres, it would just become a sublist of List of massacres in the Palestinian territories, which doesn't seem useful since that list isn't particularly long. — xDanielx T/C\R 22:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose deletion. Though may support renaming. The massacres of entire families in Gaza is indeed standalone notable topic in accordance with WP:NLIST as per tons of reliable sources, Time, Associated Press, LA Times, Amnesty international, Airwars, etc. Perhaps the problem may be a naming problem, as the article calls the “wiping out” of entire family incidents “massacres”, which is what should be discussed, definitely not the existence or notability of the entire list (i.e the incidents of “wiping out” of entire families) in the first place. Thanks for pinging me.
Stephan rostie (talk) 18:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps should be renamed to something like List of mass killings in Gaza (2023-2024). IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:27, 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 Hearts of Iron 4. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:12, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The New Order: Last Days of Europe

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

The article does not meet WP:GNG, as it contains only a single notable source, that being an article in Wargamer. Other sources include forum posts, wiki articles, and a student newspaper article. I can find no further sources on the topic. CitrusHemlock 21:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hearts of Iron 4, this lacks coverage in reliable sources, I think a redirect is suitable as it's a very popular mod for the game. -Samoht27 (talk) 18:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hearts of Iron IV per User:Samoht27. While the article doesn't have nearly enough notable sources, the mod itself is very well known online and a redirect would be more suitable. Altorespite 🌿 05:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hearts of Iron IV, I agree with the reasons provided by @Samoht27 and @Altorespite. It is a very popular mod, and is mentioned here, so I think it should be turned into a redirect going to that section of the article about HOI4. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 21:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Hearts of Iron IV, as per reasons above. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 01:44, 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 merge‎ to Martyrs of Caesarea. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lorgius

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

Tagged uncited for years and I could not find much in Google Scolar Chidgk1 (talk) 17:15, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 17:23, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:02, 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. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:03, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Giorgakis Olympios Museum of Vlach Folklore

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

As I had written at Talk:Giorgakis Olympios Museum of Vlach Folklore#Notability, I doubt this museum is all too relevant. Serres is outside the traditional homeland of the Aromanians (also known as Vlachs) centered in the Pindus, and also quite far from it. Having read much about the Aromanians, Serres has never appeared to be a center of Aromanian cultural activities in Greece like for example Veria in modern days. The sources talking about this museum seem to be all in Greek, of which I speak nothing, so native speakers of Greek could be more useful in determining the topic's notability. Meanwhile, here's what I've found:

In Google Books, I've found passing mentions of the parent cultural association of the museum [1] [2] [3]. That's it basically. The museum isn't mentioned either in this exhaustive book on the Aromanians by renowed author Asterios I. Koukoudis [4]. In Vlahoi.net, probably the greatest website about the Aromanians in Greece, there is some more information on the association, and the museum is only made passing mentions [5]. In this book hosted on the website, there's some very limited information on the museum: that it was established in 2008, the several sections it has and its objectives [6]. In Google Scholar I've tried a couple word combinations and haven't been able to find anything at all about the museum, and some passing mentions of the parent association. I have tried to find information on the museum on Aromanian websites and magazines, and I haven't been able to find anything, not even mentions of the association, though because I don't speak Aromanian either it is possible something may have slipped, but I doubt it'd be anything big. Finally it is, expectedly, with a regular Google search that I find the most information, but it's all from touristic or government and regional websites [7] [8]. Passing mentions are also to be found in local media, which in theory is reliable [9] [10] [11] [12], but again these articles don't contain much info. Also this museum does not have an entry at museumsofmacedonia.gr, not sure if it is an authoritative source but we have the article Sarakatsani Folklore Museum completely based on this website.

This article was created by a user with only 13 edits, all of them on this page [13]. The museum does not have an article in Greek Wikipedia, it only also does in Bulgarian Wikipedia, which has many low-quality articles on the Aromanians of questionable notability (just click on some biographies here [14] if you're wondering why do I say this). The Giorgakis Olympios Association of Vlachs of Serres, the parent association of this museum, is one of over a hundred of Aromanian associations in Greece which arent individually notable but which are grouped into the Panhellenic Federation of Cultural Associations of Vlachs, so any notable info on the museum could simply be covered in the article about the federation if truly necessary (proof for the association's membership in the federation: [15]). Serres#Places of interest and #Culture or Aromanians in Greece could also cover the few rescuable information that there could be. I see there's few coverage to be found on the museum in reliable sources and that it is hardly notable. The current sources on the article are unreliable, one is the page of the parent association and another is a government touristic website. Super Ψ Dro 15:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to ask for the judgement, if it's okay by them, of users Khirurg and Cplakidas. Surely they will have an easier time navigating through Greek sources and I'd appreciate having their opinion as a non-Greek speaker, though they can feel free to ignore this ping if they're not interested or don't have the time. Super Ψ Dro 15:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads-up, Super Dromaeosaurus. The museum is indeed outside the traditional area of Vlach settlement, but the association seems to be active and fairly large, and has some info as to how Vlachs spread to the region as the result of merchant activities in the 18th, and Ottoman persecutions in the early 19th century. The museum also appears to be a substantial building. In Google, the Greek name comes up a lot in small news items, but of the 'Sights in Serres' or 'Politician visits Museum' type. Frankly, the museum doesn't appear very notable per WP:GNG, as is the case for many smaller museums. Generally I am not a fan of deletions, but in this case I think just mentioning it in the article on Serres would be enough, as we barely have enough content for a stub either way. Constantine ✍ 15:46, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:40, 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. Complex/Rational 21:49, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Geoffrey Freire Marreco

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

This seems like a case of someone 'inheriting' notability from their family. A WP:BEFORE search mostly revealed ancestry.com-type links. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. The references in the article are either trivial passing mentions (like a single sentence on page 20 of this book - which is substantively about a different biographical subject), directory style entries (as here), unreliable sources (such as thepeerage.com, wikitree.com or findagrave.com), or webpages which do not mention the subject of this article at all (like this). Outside of the article, and per nom, my own WP:BEFORE efforts have only returned a handful of family history (ancestry.com) type entries, mentions in obituaries of family members (like this) and "wedding announcements" type stuff in society pages (as we find here). I can find nothing to suggest that the subject has been the topic of significant and in-depth coverage in reliable/independent sources. As would be expected for a subject of this type. Notability is not inherited. Wikipedia is not a family history site. Guliolopez (talk) 21:40, 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. Complex/Rational 21:47, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naoki Mihara

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

When the claim to notability is playing 316 minutes in Japan's second league, as well as 3 times in a lower US league, the situation is pretty dire and the sources are nowhere near good enough to meet WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. No help in ja:wiki. Creator is blocked indefinitely. Geschichte (talk) 19:27, 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. Complex/Rational 21:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Hyun-min

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

Played 10 times (probably not full games) in the K League 15 years ago. It would take very convincing sources for him to pass WP:SPORTCRIT or WP:GNG. Creator's talk page is absolutely plastered with non-notable Korean footballers. Geschichte (talk) 19:25, 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 delete‎. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:12, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kodai Nagashima

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

Footballer who played a grand total of 10 minutes in Japan's third league. Though he also played in amateur leagues and presently in Cambodia, it would take some convincing sources for him to pass WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. Ja:wiki only provides primary sources. Geschichte (talk) 19:22, 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. Complex/Rational 21:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noriki Fuke

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

Footballer who played a grand total of 401 minutes before retiring from the game. References are not independent and significant, with a possible exception here, which builds on a press conference, and describes the player before entering the league, i.e. when he hadn't done anything noteworthy. I believe it falls short of WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. Geschichte (talk) 19:20, 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 List of Johnson solids. asilvering (talk) 00:10, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of convex regular-faced polyhedra

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

The list may seem to be redundant, consisted of convex polyhedron's classes in the following: we have five Platonic solids list, we have Archimedean solid and Catalan solid's list, and we have Johnson solids list. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 00:43, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have editors arguing for Delete, Keep and Merge (but with no target article mentioned). More discussion is needed is come to a consensus. If you suggest a Redirect or Merge, please include a target article as well.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:43, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: OwenX's argument looks pretty definitive to me, does anyone else agree?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 19:13, 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 no consensus‎. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:13, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of radio stations in Turkey

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

As this has been tagged uncited for many years is it any use keeping? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:10, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 17:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 19:12, 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 no consensus‎. Most here agree that there is very little to write about this topic, but that the sources are solid. As asilvering suggests, editors are encouraged to find a suitable merge target, where the subject can be covered as part of a broader topic. Owen× ☎ 22:09, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Jews in Cambodia

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

Extremely small minority with little coverage, the article is largely about individual people in Cambodia who are Jewish with little suggestion of an actual community. If this is notable you could make thousands of articles about every ethnic group in every country. Gazingo (talk) 15:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we get some more discussion on the proposed merge as an ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 19:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep for better or worse, this IS the history of the Jews in Cambodia. The article has WP:RS and it is WP:V as well as WP:N. Smallness of size is not a "sin" when it comes to the Jewish People as they are a small sized nationality out of the world's billions of people. IZAK (talk) 22:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: I have posted the following on the nominator's talk page: Hi, and welcome to WP. I have spent over twenty years gathering material to build up a comprehensive history of the Jews in all of the world's countries, see Category:Jewish history by country. Some countries are large and some are small. Some Jewish communities are likewise small or large or old and new, but still they are part of the Jewish history of those countries and of Jewish history and the Jews in general. See my response to your nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Jews in Cambodia: Your premise about the history of the Jews in any country, i.e. Jewish history, is wrong because Jews are ALWAYS a tiny minority compared to surrounding populations. For example, in the world today there are about seven billion people while there are only about 15 million Jews on planet Earth. Yet Jews are to be found everywhere and they always make WP:N contributions to their host nations regardless if they arrived there fifty years ago or five hundred years ago and regardless if they amount to 500 people or 500,000 people. Please note WP:DONOTDEMOLISH! Therefore, kindly withdraw your nomination because it interferes with the goal of building a comprehensive history of the Jews in all countries and nations on WP, no matter how large or small those Jewish communities are they are all part of the Jewish People who are a tiny, yet very much WP:N nationality and religious group in the world both historically and in the present! Thank you for your understanding! IZAK (talk) 23:10, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Religion in Cambodia#Judaism is a potential merge target if consensus is against retaining this article as is. Left guide (talk) 08:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The only issues are (1) whether there is significant coverage of the topic, and (2) whether a subject is either too big or too small for its own article. Clearly, there are at least three reliable sources with some essential information about the topic, so that is settled. The periodical articles about the Princess’s Bat Mitzvah, philanthropy, and diplomacy are all good references about the subject. At AfD, regardless of how many (quantitative), we lean on how good (qualitative) the data is. Sometimes we look deeper to see if there is zero connection between the data to see whether there was artificial synthesis. This matter is often subjective, and in my mind there’s not synthetic organization; there is a logical correlation between the individual parts of the article and the whole. That can be a difficult task. Secondly, we have struggled with subjects that are too small or big for our encyclopedia. On one hand, we are not a good place for news and other small incidents. On the other hand, we can’t deal with run of the mill items or lists that might include everything. What I’m saying is this: we have never decided on a defined, objective quantum of the smallest possible number of items or data that are needed for an stub to exist. Jews have been a discrete and insular minority in every country from 70 CE until 1948. What is our quantum or velleity? Do we need a minimum of 137 Irish in Uruguay? If we had an objective number for articles of this sort, History of Jews in X, perhaps a minyan? Bearian (talk)
  • Delete. I would support this article if it had significant content, but it doesn't. Just look at it: a Chabad house (like almost every country), mention of two people not notable enough for their own articles (only one of them Cambodian), export of hair (nothing to do with Jews in Cambodia), and an American charity also not notable enough for their own article. Plus three sentences repeating stuff from Cambodia–Israel relations. There is nothing whatever about a community of Jews in Cambodia and only one(!!) Cambodian Jew is even mentioned. This is nowhere near enough for an article. It's a light-year from meeting GNG. Zerotalk 09:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Zero0000 are you arguing that this is synthesis? Bearian (talk) 11:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Zero0000: @Gazingo: @DesiMoore: I have to strongly disagree with all of you for the following reasons. (a) No one has ever said on WP that there has to be a "community" of Jews in a country for that country to have an article about the "History of the Jews in ____", because just having *Jews*, any number or any kind of Jews in a country qualifies for an article like the History of the Jews in Cambodia. (b) As long as there are reasonable WP:RS and it's WP:V to support an article it is enough to have a short article about a subject such as this. (c) This article is far better than a WP:STUB, and had it been a stub it would be a justified beginning to a good and interesting WP article. (d) This article is certainly WP:N because just as there is a short article about Jews in Cambodia on the Jewish Virtual Library there is no reason for WP now to cut off its nose to spite its face because it may lack a long history or a huge community. And by the way, the Jewish Virtual Library article clearly states that "the small Jewish community there consists of ex-patriots, NGO workers, travelers, hikers, and adventurers." (e) By your dismissive tone and words you are clearly displaying an attitude of WP:IDONTLIKEIT which as you know is NOT a reason to delete longstanding WP articles. (f) Jewish history also contains Modern Jewish historiography --> "which is the development of the Jewish historical narrative into the modern era" including into far-flung countries such as Cambodia that formerly had no known contact with Jews but in modern times has seen a significant influx of all kinds of Jews into it as this article clearly proves. IZAK (talk) 18:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      IZAK, you are quite right that I don't like it. I don't like any articles on invented topics with negligible content. I wouldn't even have brought this article to AfD if I'd seen it; I would have PRODed it for speedy deletion as an obvious notability failure. The fact is, only one of the sources (the Chabad one) supports this being a notable subject. Zerotalk 11:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Zero0000: In fact the article was originally prodded [20] but an alert and smart editor deprodded [21] it seeing that it could lead to controversy. Let me try to see if I can improve the article. IZAK (talk) 20:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Although the sources seem very good, there's little to suggest that this subject is enough for a standalone article. Per Zero, the content borders on incoherence and it's not of much use to potential users. DesiMoore (talk) 16:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @DesiMoore: You make no sense! You do agree that this article has WP:RS and is therefore WP:V, and thus also qualifies for WP:N, then you allege that "it's not of much use to potential users" -- how do you know that? Are you privy to the amount of readers all over the world who rely on Wikipedia to learn about Jewish history in all the world's countries? Rather than poo-pooing this article you should be encouraging WP editors to be WP:BEBOLD and add new material even about subjects that may not interest you but are of value to lots of others out there on the world wide web! IZAK (talk) 23:34, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There are credible reliable and verifiable sources already in the article that describe the topic and demonstrates that the notability standard is met. The significance of Jews and Jewish conversion in a country like Cambodia is notable, along with other topics adequately supported in the article. Alansohn (talk) 17:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Are there Jews there? Are there any reliable sources for their history? No reason to delete. Eladkarmel (talk) 19:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • NOTE: I have upgraded the article by adding two new sections: Jews and Judaism in Cambodia and

Comparison of the Jewish and Cambodian Holocausts. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 22:30, 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! 22:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hamidreza Sadri

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

Fails notability, I'm not sure if he is notable enough. he only participated in World senior championships and lost in the first round. his only achievement is in Asian Junior level which is probably not good enough. not much coverage about him too. Sports2021 (talk) 16:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He won the gold medal in the world military championships 2018 Brazil AmirX0213 (talk) 11:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Reporting of results does not constitute significant independent coverage, nor do links to databases. That's especially true when the World Taekwondo link in the article is to an Olympic medalist and world champion fighter from Korea named Jun Jang. Youth events and military championships have never been accepted as showing WP notability in the martial arts. His only appearance at a major event as an adult was at the 2022 World Championships where he lost his first match in the round of 64 (and received a world ranking of 153rd). He was ranked 148th in Olympic qualifying for the Paris Olympics. Papaursa (talk) 23:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That link fixed which conneced wrong to that fighter, anyway I translated this article from farsi Wikipedia AmirX0213 (talk) 07:49, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looking for more participation. Given the Farsi Wikipedia article and the likelihood that someone will attempt to recreate this, I'd like to get a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The Farsi news sources are routine event recaps, often just directly quoting from press releases (e.g. this, which begins According to the report of the sports group and quoted from the public relations of the Taekwondo Federation), and pure Q&A interviews (like this). JoelleJay (talk) 22:42, 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 British Board of Film Classification#Current certificates which seems to have the slightly stronger reasoning, but target is one that can be handled editorially. Star Mississippi 22:46, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

E certificate

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

Stub that is already covered WP:WITHIN British Board of Film Classification. Only has two references, both of which are primary, and coverage on Google Books, Google Scholar, and JSTOR is limited to very brief mentions within broader discussions of the BBFC; little more than WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs. Some of the content here could be merged to British Board of Film Classification, but most of the content of this article is already covered there, much more concisely. Has no more WP:SIGCOV than the U-15 ratings. Masskito (talk)

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

The result was Draftify‎. I sympathize and agree with the relisting comment, but I don't see much other choice here, it's either backdoor deletion or just straight-up deletion, this at least gives a chance for some of the content to be used. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 22:24, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Music composition and composers in Pristina

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

I usually hesitate to nominate disorganized articles filled with information for deletion, hoping there’s something salvageable and not wanting to undermine the effort someone has spent hours or days creating. However, this article appears to function as a kind of WP:COATRACK and contains a lot of poorly written material, along with what I suspect is a significant amount of original research. It seems to have been written about a decade ago by a contributor involved in the "Wiki Academy Kosovo II City Marathon," who may not have adhered to best practices and instead focused on cramming in content.

The article should be divided into multiple standalone ones. I suggest extracting a list of notable subjects—individuals, events, compositions, etc...—both those with existing articles and those without, for further expansion and improvement. I would be happy to take on some of these, and others can be included in any relevant Wikiprojects. The Music of Kosovo and Classical music in Kosovo articles can be enhanced with any quality material from this article, but I don’t believe a topic specifically on "Musical compositions and composers in Pristina" is really warranted. Mooonswimmer 16:59, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is anyone volunteering to adopt the draft? I don't like the idea of draftifying something if it's just going to time out and get backdoor-deleted via G13.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 18:58, 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. ✗plicit 13:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glen Beicker Ranch Airport

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBUILD due to a lack of coverage in WP:SECONDARY sources excluding WP:ROTM mentions in aviation-related government and navigational databases. Carguychris (talk) 16:11, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 17:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 18:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. Owen× ☎ 21:38, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hester Kaplan

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

Most of the sources are to faculty pages and other profiles. The source from The New York Times is a wedding announcement and the bulk of the text of the article is about her parents and grandparents. A Google search for material about her turned up little to support a claim of notability, other than items like this one that are not the in-depth coverage required to meet the standard. Alansohn (talk) 18:55, 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 Jack Nance#Kelly Jean Van Dyke's suicide. Owen× ☎ 21:06, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Jean Van Dyke

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

This is classic oneevent territory for an otherwise not individually notable person. Needs more, Spartaz Humbug! 18:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:37, 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 Withdrawn. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manmohan (judge)

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

Similar rationale to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Navin Chawla (judge), there's little coverage that would suggest that they pass WP:GNG other than routine coverage of their appointment and cases that they have judged. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

References

  1. ^ "Justice Manmohan takes oath as Chief Justice of Delhi High Court". The Tribune. 30 September 2024. Retrieved 24 October 2024.
  2. ^ "Justice Manmohan sworn in as Chief Justice of Delhi HC". IBTimes India. 29 September 2024. Retrieved 24 October 2024.
  3. ^ Thapliyal, Nupur (9 November 2023). "Centre Appoints Justice Manmohan As Acting Chief Justice Of Delhi High Court". Supreme Court News, Latest India Legal News, Supreme Court Updates, High Courts Updates, Judgments, Law Firms News, Law School News, Latest Legal News. Retrieved 24 October 2024.
  4. ^ "Justice Manmohan takes oath as Chief Justice of Delhi High Court". The Indian Express. 29 September 2024. Retrieved 24 October 2024.
  5. ^ "Order of appointment of Shri Justice Manmohan, Judge, Delhi High Court as Chie Justice of Delhi High Court (21.09.2024)". Department of Justice. 20 November 2022. Retrieved 24 October 2024.
  6. ^ Naaz, Fareha (30 September 2024). "Justice Manmohan: All you need to know about newly sworn-in Chief Justice of Delhi High Court". mint. Retrieved 24 October 2024.
  7. ^ "Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manmohan". New Delhi District Court, Delhi. 20 November 2023. Retrieved 24 October 2024.
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. I see quite a few here calling for leaving this AfD open until after the election, when we'll have a much better idea about lasting notability for this candidate. The Keep !votes are more numerous, but the Delete and Redirect ones carry more P&G weight. So I'll close this as no-consensus, and allow for early renomination two weeks from now, when the subject's political status, and the resulting source coverage, is clearer. This makes more sense than relisting, and then expecting those who voiced their opinion before the election to amend their !vote, or the closer trying to discount !votes based on when they were entered. Owen× ☎ 21:04, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Sheehy (businessman)

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

This is actually a second AFD. The outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Sheehy (American politician) was a strong consensus to redirect, with two "delete"s and no "keep"s. This new article was created as a redirect to the same target [22], on the grounds that in the Timothy Sheehy disambiguation page he's "not a politician yet". Another editor came along a week later and recreated the last article from that new redirect. A Google search for him, minus the word "Senate", turns up no significant coverate in reliable sources as a businessman or a soldier. The US is now three weeks away from a national election, and all of the major candidates are getting heavy press coverage. db-repost was declined, and the declining admin took a straw poll of editors from the last AFD at Talk:Tim Sheehy (businessman), and all have upheld the last consensus so far. So this article should be deleted, as it's really a renamed repost of Tim Sheehy (American politician). If Sheehy wins, then that article should obviously be un-redirected and expanded. Wikishovel (talk) 13:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify Sheehy does not have sufficient notability as a political candidate and businessman; Sheehy has never held public office. Should Sheehy win, we can make the draft an article. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 17:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not voting on this AfD but this does make far more sense, to throw my own two cents in here, since he does have potential to become notable very soon. Don't delete the draft with such a high probability of him being elected within the next 3 weeks and 2 days. EytanMelech (talk) 02:37, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.
There are likely thousands of undecided voters in Montana who don't know much about Sheehy, so they'll be coming on Wikipedia to look up information on him. Why would we disenfranchise them by deleting his page???
This is not like Delaware's senate race where it won't matter. This is a major senate race where almost every outlet says Sheehy is favored. It would seem that by deleting this page and denying valuable information to voters, it means you're seeking to help his opponent win. I had no idea Wikipedia was a partisan site seeking to help one candidate win by making the other seem less serious, but here we see i suppose? 2601:CF:0:9A0:B227:9473:F80D:C5D5 (talk) 02:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC) — 2601:CF:0:9A0:B227:9473:F80D:C5D5 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 2601:CF:0:9A0:B227:9473:F80D:C5D5 (UTC).[reply]
Please see WP:ITSIMPORTANT. Wikishovel (talk) 07:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He is a candidate for US Senate from Montana. Putting aside my belief that this even in itself merits an article creation, he has additionally been covered in a lot of sources, both local and national and even international. [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] Zlad! (talk) 03:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP
Tim Sheehy is a major party candidate in a Senate race with major national attention. This race has received millions in spending on advertising, and voters in Montana deserve easy access to basic information on the candidates running in their race. It should also be noted that in an extremely contentious and likely close election, Tim Sheehy is the most likely of any Senate candidate to flip a seat. There are pages for far less notable figures who stood no chance of winning. There seems to be no reason to delete his page except for partisanship.Is — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scooter3 (talk • contribs)
I'm not American, and the outcome of this election means nothing to me, so partisanship (and an anonymous poster above accused me of the same) is not the problem here. As for pages about less notable people, please see WP:WHATABOUTX. Wikishovel (talk) 11:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep He is ahead in the polls, and is pretty likely to be Montana's next senator. Why delete? Im a democrat myself, and I think that thousands of undecided voters will look at both pages. Wikipedia shouldnt be biased, especially in a major tossup election. Lukt64 (talk) 03:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:ITSIMPORTANT. It's true that he's ahead in the polls, and if he does win, then as I said in my nomination at the top, Tim Sheehy (American politician) should be unredirected and expanded. Wikishovel (talk) 07:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and restore the redirect. I have absolutely no idea why this was restored, as people notable for just being candidates have no presumptive notability. SportingFlyer T·C 04:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are a number of keep !votes above and below which say he should have his page kept because he's a candidate. He wasn't notable before, the page was only restored because he's a candidate, and we deal with enduring notability. There are plenty of candidates from all over the world who failed to win the election and ten years later would not deserve a page. I think that's the case here. If he wins, then we can restore it, otherwise redirect to the election or possibly his company. SportingFlyer T·C 18:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've always believed being a major party nominee for federal office should be noteworthy enough to have an article. AvRand (talk) 07:22, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but the consensus at WP:NPOL from a far higher number of editors than you and I decided otherwise. Wikishovel (talk) 07:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NPOL states: Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline.. Djflem (talk) 07:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As the creator of the page (as well as a Democrat living in Montana), I believe that he is, without question, notable enough for Wikipedia, even if he loses. If he wins, I would probably be in favor of moving the page to Tim Sheehy (American politician) or a new page titled Tim Sheehy (senator). If he loses, I still believe he's notable enough for a Wikipedia page because he founded Bridger Aerospace and was a former Navy SEAL. MontanaMako (talk) 15:00, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:NOTINHERITED: articles about heads of notable companies regularly get redirected, if they're not notable independently of the company. Not meeting guidelines for notability still applies, even if notability is claimed for three separate things. Wikishovel (talk) 11:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep His aerospace company has a Wikipedia article because it's notable, and he has had numerous articles written about him as a candidate in one of the two most important Senate races of 2024 (Montana and Ohio, since West Virginia is guaranteed to flip after Manchin left). Bill Williams 20:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:NOTINHERITED: articles about heads of notable companies regularly get redirected, if they're not notable independently of the company. Wikishovel (talk) 11:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:WHATABOUTX and WP:ITSUSEFUL. If Sam Brown is judged to fail Wikipedia's guidelines for notability, then that article should also be nominated for deletion. Wikishovel (talk) 11:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Calwatch: can you provide some examples please? In a search for his name, excluding the word "Senate", the coverage in reliable sources is quite poor. Wikishovel (talk) 22:01, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A search earch with navy seal, Bridger Aerospace, Mudlsingers, Afghanistan, or any of a number of combinations will provide many many hits and articles about Sheehy, so whats the purpose of the suggestion? Djflem (talk) 06:43, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose is to find "coverage that he received prior to filing for candidacy", as User:Calwatch suggests. I couldn't find much, and that's ostensibly what this article is about, Tim Sheehy the businessman. A redirect to Bridger Aerospace would be fine by me, unless of course he wins the election. Wikishovel (talk) 07:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This AfD suffered from large scale infestation by canvassed votes, as evidenced by the many inexperienced participants relying on irrelevant arguments to keep the page. However, even if we discard those, there's still no consensus either way. Relisting to get more P&G-based views.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:10, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SWinxy, same rationale should be applied to Eric Hovde Microplastic Consumer (talk) 20:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning keep. I am inclined to think that his notability as a businessman and author is sufficient, even if coverage of these aspects of his life comes primarily in the context of his political campaign. BD2412 T 01:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment WP:POLOUTCOMES suggests that a redirect to the race is an appropriate outcome (and those pages can contain verifiable information about the candidates). In general, we know that NPOL is largely a pass/fail criteria, but even if a subject fails NPOL, they can still pass GNG. The next question is whether the subject is known only for one event (which can encompass a political campaign), and to an extent, we often make a guess about the enduring notability of the subject.
Candidates are hard to make a determination on whether a stand-alone article is appropriate especially when a candidate may only be known for their political campaign (and not public figures prior or after the campaign). If a candidate does have a stand-alone page, is deemed now and forever notable, any (past or future) verifiable information (flattering or unflattering) can be added to the page (with few recourses for a living person, and fewer recourses for a deceased individual).
I say all that but conclude that in the last 20 days before an election, passions about political candidates run high, and it can be hard to be objective in AFD, and harder yet to delete a US candidate running as a major party nominee for US Senate. And, it is especially hard if a candidate who is leading in the polls does not have a stand-alone page but their opponent does. If the subject is not elected November 5, my suggestion would be to revisit this discussion to truly determine if the subject is a WP:BLP1E. --Enos733 (talk) 05:27, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think it's unfair to be quick to delete an article on a candidate who is strongly favored to become a senator. Not to mention Sheehy has other facts outside of his senate run (such as his business). I also think it would be unfair to only have one page for a two-candidate race in what is arguably one of the most competitive senate races in the U.S. this year Dancingtudorqueen (talk) 03:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Keep There are multiple articles mentioning Tim Sheehy. This de facto makes him a public figure. LaMoria1 (talk) 20:56, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Sheehy is not just a generic candidate running for U. S. House or U. S. Senate who has no chance of winning; he is a candidate in an election that is widely seen as one that could decide control of the United States Senate. Even though media coverage of him is related to his campaign, there is a large enough amount of substantial media coverage about Sheehy as a person that I would argue he meets the GNG. I also reject the notion that his article should be deleted if he doesn't win the election; if an article is genuinely notable at one point in time, it should always be notable absent a major change in how we define notability. Jackattack1597 (talk) 00:23, 27 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. Thank you, XOR'easter and David Eppstein, for your prompt help on this. Owen× ☎ 20:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Compound of tesseract and 16-cell

[edit]
Compound of tesseract and 16-cell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject is not notable. None of the references appear to actually reference the topic, and searching for more doesn't seem to bring up anything under this name. The first is a massive self-published list of compounds of various types. It may appear somewhere within this - although searching for the relevant terms and reading through the sections of 4D compounds did not find it for me - however regardless it is clearly not a WP:RS. The second appears to be a scholarly article, but it doesn't appear mention the topic, it is referenced for the vertex coordinates of the constituent components. The final two sources are pages on the constituent components separately. The external links appear to be the only places where this component is mentioned outside of this Wikipedia article, but they are self-published and extremely brief. Even reading the article it is unclear what is supposed notable about this compound. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 13:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Pinging @David Eppstein: and @XOR'easter: for more views.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:58, 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! 17:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purvesh Sarnaik

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

The subject is a non-notable person, failing both WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Holding the position of working president of Yuva Sena (youth wing of a specific unit in Maharashtra state) and serving as a municipal corporator do not, on their own, establish sufficient notability. Additionally, the subject has not made significant contributions to the film industry and thus fails to meet WP:PRODUCER. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 16:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) TheSlumPanda (talk) 10:45, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Stein

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

He is a professor not a dean or vice chancellor at any University or hasn’t received any national or international prestigious award. fails,WP:NPROF. Mainly reference used are of university self or publication sites, lack of independent reliable sources to establish notability, fails WP:GNG. TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is inaccurate. Michael Stein is incoming Dean of the Boston University School of Public Health (https://www.bu.edu/sph/news/articles/2024/michael-stein-appointed-interim-dean-of-school-of-public-health/)
Regarding notability: he has appeared on Peabody award-winning radio (https://freshairarchive.org/guests/michael-stein), has had his books reviewed in the New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/books/09masl.html), and is a prolific researcher with >450 peer-reviewed publications. He is also the author of 14 books, which constitutes a "well-known [...] collective body of work [that] have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". [[39]] Deciderization (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In case of becoming an interim dean i think that it doesn’t give directly notability because it will be only a temporary post for short period of time till the election of new permanent dean. Secondly interviews as generally considered non reliable because everything the interviewee says is primary and non independent per, wikipedia:Interviews #Notability . But yes he has some books which are reviewed by Some Independent and Reliable Sites i.e, NYC, Washington dc. Which is a good measure for his notability. TheSlumPanda (talk) 21:50, 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! 17:21, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth Swift

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

Non-notable RL player. Only coverage I could find is regarding his untimely death, which isn't enough for an article per WP:ONEEVENT and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. J Mo 101 (talk) 16:25, 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 delete‎. Randykitty (talk) 15:55, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Annual passenger earnings details of railway stations in Kerala

[edit]
Annual passenger earnings details of railway stations in Kerala (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is just a copy of published railway statistics (as shown in the references). There is no explanation or context provided, just a bunch of huge tables. WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:NOTSTATS should apply.

I think this information would be better in individual stations' articles. NS-Merni (talk) 15:50, 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 and redirect‎ to Caloocan#Barangays. Randykitty (talk) 15:53, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barangay 79

[edit]
Barangay 79 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG; all 4 references are census data. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove my article, and i understand that my article didn't meet your taste thank you. Minty0216 (talk) 20:59, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:05, 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. Randykitty (talk) 15:49, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Valente (politician)

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

WP:BLP of a suburban municipal councillor, not properly referenced as passing WP:NPOL #2. As always, city councillors are not all "inherently" notable just because they exist, and must show credible reasons why they should be seen as special cases of significantly greater notability than the norm for city councillors (nationalized prominence, unusual depth and volume of coverage well beyond the norm, etc.) — but apart from one primary source that isn't support for notability at all, this is otherwise referenced entirely to run of the mill coverage in the city's weekly hyperlocal community newspaper, of the type that every city councillor in every city can always show, and does not demonstrate a credible reason why he would be more special than any of his colleagues who don't have articles. The only attempt at "impact of his work on the council" shown here is that he served on community committees, which is not at all unusual for a city councillor, and there's absolutely no documentation of any specific accomplishments on those committees to establish the long-term significance of his participation. Bearcat (talk) 15:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am unable to find anything on him which goes beyond routine coverage of his work as a councillor (example), fails WP:POLITICIAN and no indication anywhere of any other noteworthy achievements. Valenciano (talk) 10:24, 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. Randykitty (talk) 15:44, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akali Sahib Singh Kaladhari

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

Unreferenced, so not clear how notable this individual is. The article is so poorly written, it's a wonder it passed review. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:24, 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. No objection to creating a redirect to the list of mayors if that article is kept after the current AFD. Randykitty (talk) 15:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Potter (politician)

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

Mayor of a small town of 3000 people. Most sources are primary, the overwhelming majority being government sources. Fails WP:NPOL. AusLondonder (talk) 15:16, 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:13, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Our Lady of Fatima College (Port Harcourt)

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

Just one single source. No other source to proof notability. 7G🍁 (🪓) 14:46, 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 List of Slovakia international footballers. There was support for the assumption that sources proving notability are likely to exist, but as of closing, none were found. This ATD will make it easier to revert to an article if and when such sources are located. Owen× ☎ 14:44, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stanislav Moravec

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

I can prove Moravec exists/existed because he has/had four appearances for Slovakia national football team and currently works as a manager, neither of which is considered free pass. Regarding secondary sources, the best I found is Gulf Times. Corresponding Wikipedia articles in other languages don't provide significant coverage of him.

Please note that this birth name is common in the Czechoslovak scene, so it's possible to find namesakes such as a kid footballer, which I can't prove whether or not he is related to the former footballer. This article has existed for 16 years without any decent source, and a redirect to List of Slovakia international footballers might be an alternative to deletion.

⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing an amateur team looks like a weak claim to notability. As Moravec's profile is not listed in the current squad anymore, I doubt he left the club, but probably have to ask the club for confirmation. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that he played his career in a top-tier league etc. is based on now-defunct guideline NFOOTBALL. There are no sources which prove notability of this person, so the article should be redirect to List of Slovakia international footballers or deleted. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with you, NFOOTBALL was a guideline that opened up for everyone who played even a single minute in this and that competition. That's not remote to the subject we are talking about here. Geschichte (talk) 16:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Per above. Some of the recent nominations of these Slovak players have not had a good WP:BEFORE. Svartner (talk) 19:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect. Where is the required citation to a GNG source? Footballer accomplishment/league play was explicitly deprecated as a notability rationale, there is no carve-out for people who meet some arbitrary standard like "interesting career". I searched sport.sk archives and found only a handful of passing mentions (like this and this) and quotes from him as coach, e.g. this. Nothing in Spectator, SK Today, Sky Sports; nothing in the Wiki Library. If someone manages to find actual coverage of him somewhere they can easily go into the redirect history and restore the three sentences currently there. JoelleJay (talk) 23:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question @JoelleJay: Redirect to where? I don't see how you can redirect, I also find it strange that people above are voting to keep over my comment, at no point did I say keep! Seems you managed to find some sources know, they seem a bit weak know. There is a reason why he earned four national team caps hence my comment above, find that out and that could help with the GNG problem. Regards. Govvy (talk) 10:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Redirect to where? His name is mentioned in List of Slovakia international footballers.
    As GiantSnowman said, given the generation of this former footballer, there might be archived sources. We just have to know whether or not they provide significant coverage of Moravec.
    ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:45, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I based my redirect recommendation on what Clariniie had said above in response to Geschichte. GNG does say Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability, so if a search of the online archives of four of the top Slovak sports news orgs didn't yield anything, that ought to count for something. The article can be recreated if someone finds SIGCOV in offline newspapers, but right now it directly violates SPORTCRIT. JoelleJay (talk) 17:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JoelleJay: The problem with doing that redirect, it then hides all his other activity, it's better to delete the name, that way if people search for it, they will also find it on other pages, like FK Dukla Banská Bystrica, where he is listed as notable. But why is he notable there you must add, because he also has international caps, there maybe another reason. So the redirect logic is not a sound one. Besides, I'd still believe he is notable for the reason, getting to be capped by the national team is a good feet. I feel the nomination has not considered this at all, and are putting his name in the same boat as small islander nations. Moravec was selected from a much bigger pool of footballers to choose from. This is where the nomination fails, because this hasn't taken that into account. Govvy (talk) 17:44, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why should we take that into account when those kinds of criteria were explicitly deprecated from NSPORT? And the article is still required to cite a source of SIGCOV even if the subject does meet a sport-specific criterion. JoelleJay (talk) 18:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was explaining why a redirect wouldn't work and a few issues, so why on Earth would you say deprecated from NSPORT. People talk about silly wikipedia policies all the time and those that are doing that rarely look for sources from my prospective. Govvy (talk) 22:12, 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. ✗plicit 13:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idelfonso da Silva

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

NFT has him listed both under this name and "Afonso Carson", a matter which caused confusion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afonso Carson. In any case, this is a footballer that has played only 68 mins of international football and with no apparent significant coverage at all. I have searched under "Idelfonso da Silva" and "Afonso Carson" and can find no sign of WP:SPORTBASIC being met. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 12:33, 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 speedy delete‎. WP:G11 performed by User:Justlettersandnumbers (non-admin closure) Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hooman Daval

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

This article creator is the same subject hence there is confirm WP:COI, also it doesn’t passes the notability guidelines, fails WP:GNG and was also previously deleted TheSlumPanda (talk) 09:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. Arguments for deletion are strong, but consensus is that sources meet our notability guidelines. Feel free to renominate in six months, or discuss merging with similar articles on the Talk page. Owen× ☎ 14:09, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of Nahida and Samar Anton

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

Notability tag was challenged on the basis that there was sigcov - which is not really how notability for events works, every item of breaking news gets sigcov. There is no lasting and analytical coverage in this article to fulfill NEVENT. Every source in this article is from the week it happened. For an event to pass notability, it must receive analytical and continued coverage, of which this has neither, it's just "this thing happened", which is not encyclopedic. This has some passing mentions but no sigcov. WP:PRIMARYNEWS. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just in a brief search, I was able to find continued coverage in the following places: 1 2 34 5. There may be more, but I think this should be sufficient. Arguably this coverage is analytical since it focuses on the killing as part of the broader plight of Christians in Gaza. I think it is also too early to say definitively that coverage of this event has subsided. We aren't even past the 1 year anniversary of the event, and the war is still ongoing. It's not hard to imagine Pope Francis's use of the word terrorism being acknowledged in the context of his legacy, or this incident being used in some future international criminal proceeding. I'm not sure if the possibility of future notability is admissible as evidence right now, but I feel we should consider that the possibility of it receiving renewed coverage at some later date has not yet passed. Unbandito (talk) 18:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are passing mentions, except for the Atlantic piece, which cannot count as continued coverage as it was published only a month later. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (I already anticipate the reply but this is as much as I wish to say about 'If it's not notable "Now", then it is not notable.' No thread. Just a spur to reflection.

“Germans murder 700,000 Jews in Poland” Daily Telegraph 25 June 1942 the article, which referred to “the greatest massacre in the world’s history”, was published on the fifth page of a six-page issue. And it got no traction elsewhere.Nishidani (talk) 22:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  • This comment is contrary to policy and therefore does not contribute to consensus. From WP:NTEMP: "Notability is not temporary; once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage." Zerotalk 02:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, because notability is about secondary sources, all of the sources here are WP:PRIMARYNEWS. None contribute to notability. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, that's wrong, wrong and wrong. You don't understand policy and almost all of the news coverage was secondary anyway. Zerotalk 02:27, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The primary sources page defines reporting on events and breaking news reports to be primary sources. The closest thing to a secondary source is the Atlantic report, which is decent, but at only 1 month after it happened is not sustained coverage. The reports here are not secondary. This does not pass any aspect of WP:NEVENT. The later coverage is all passing mentions and not sigcov. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not a policy page, it's an essay. But you are wrong anyway. When a news organization repeats news collected by another news organization, that's secondary coverage. Most are like that. But that's irrelevant anyway; reports of an event in a reliable news source have counted towards notability since the beginning of Wikipedia and you are more than 20 years too late in arguing against it. Zerotalk 02:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "When a news organization repeats news collected by another news organization, that's secondary coverage." ??????? No. Yes it's an essay, but it's an explanatory one and that primary sources do not contribute to notability is the guideline. We do not have an article on every single tragedy that has ever made the news without sustained coverage, nor should we.
    Read WP:NEVENT. This fails all aspects - was briefly covered in any significant detail, it did not have a lasting impact, it was not retrospectively or historically analyzed, significant coverage was for less than a month, the coverage was not in depth. Just because people constantly flout NEVENT and NOTNEWS does not mean it is not the rules. Wikipedia is not a website for every single news item that ever had a weeks worth of coverage, and there is not any way to write this article that does not violate WP:NOTNEWS. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This event was quite famous. Although it naturally got more coverage in the days after it happened, there was also quite a lot of coverage in the following months and it still gets occasional coverage. Zerotalk 02:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This event was covered in detail by multiple news sources and spoken out about by multiple politicians and religious leaders. It was also covered by a variety of different news agencies. Pinging User:ToeSchmoker (talk)as they removed the Notability tag that was previously placed by PARAKANYAA (talk)Leaky.Solar (talk) 19:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is one of several events in close sequence which shocked certainly the Catholic Church and its natural protests, and gestures like inviting both Israeli and Palestinians to the Vatican on the same day led to a barrage of complaints from rabbinical circles. I think the rabbi of Milan even expressed shock that the Vatican was denying Israeli the exclusive solidarity he thought they were entitled to. There is an excellent book out recently by two Jesuits, Giovanni Sale, David Neuhaus's Israele e Palestina: Un conflitto senza fine?, Il Pellegrino Edizioni 2024 which goes to great lengths, in response to that sequence of events, to trace the whole history of the conflict from its origins in quite impressive detail, and they include this particular incident in their narrative as important. The wider world may not follow this up but it will reverberate among Christians/Catholics, who have managed to maintain an historic presence in Gaza for close to 2,000 years. readers might care to look at the Manuel Musallam page. He served there when Hamas was in control.Nishidani (talk) 16:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nishidani How much do they discuss this event in the book? If it's in depth or significant it may help. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per GNG guidelines, specifically notability not being temporary. ToeSchmoker (talk) 16:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Notability is not temporary once notability has been established. The notability for this event was never established per our standards at WP:NEVENT. It was not notable and then become non notable, but was never notable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not particularly interested in going back and forth debating the wiki guidelines and the multitude of essays. We both interpret these things differently and that is okay. ToeSchmoker (talk) 08:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment: i've done a little bit of copyediting, and i partially agree with both arguments here. there is no doubt that this particular war crime is important in the recent development of Holy See–Israel relations, and in informing broader Catholic perception of Israel. i think the book cited by Nishidani could be promising (i don't read Italian) if it does indeed provide analysis of how this specific killing affected those relations. however, that aside, i'm also inclined to agree with PARAKANYAA & the alien that the analytical and historical coverage is generally lacking. i also don't find the "it's famous and people talked about it" argument convincing in the slightest. i think, if no more can be squeezed out of that book, then a merge to the Holy See-Israel relations article could maybe be good (although that article could really use some cleanup). ... sawyer * he/they * talk 17:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I would be fine with merging it there. If it later happens to receive retrospective coverage (which seems a non-zero possibility) it can be split out. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    agreed - i could definitely see this being covered in future retrospectives of the Gaza crisis. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 12:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Notable event which received international coverage, no reason for its deletion. Red Phoenician (talk) 02:57, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge: There are already hundreds of articles on the Hamas-Israel conflict, in dozens of categories and subcategories. It is recentism on steroids. They should be condensed and merged wherever possible. This incident deserves a paragraph in the page on Holy See–Israel relations, no more. Utilisateur19911 (talk) 07:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge? Of course, these are Palestinian victims of terrorism and so, unlike the numerous pages on Israeli victims of the same -Murders of Neta Sorek and Kristine Luken,Deaths and ransoming of Oron Shaul and Hadar Goldin, Murder of Helena Rapp,Killing of Binyamin Meisner, Killing of Avi Sasportas and Ilan Saadon, Abduction and killing of Yaron Chen, Abduction and killing of Nachshon Wachsman,Abduction and killing of Nissim Toledano, Murder of Asher and Yonatan Palmer,Death of Yehuda Shoham,Murder of Ofir Rahum,Murder of Shalhevet Pass, Murder of Koby Mandell and Yosef Ishran, Murder of the Hatuel family, etc.etc.etc.,- they are not notable and must be disappeared in a drastically slimmed down merge. Nishidani (talk) 12:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you re-read my post carefully, you may notice that it applies to all articles related to the conflict. Utilisateur19911 (talk) 12:45, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I read your post closely, as I read everything. It dismisses this article as 'recentism on steroids', which would equally apply to the articles of Israeli victims, which are almost never subject to AfD, unlike the occasional Palestinian article of this type. Read WP:Systemic bias. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.Nishidani (talk) 12:57, 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 Draftify‎. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 11:06, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Levon Tigranyants

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

Ordinarily I would have wanted to draftify this as part of NPP but it is way outside the 90 day limit. Draftification is my preferred option unless anyone is able to show more sources. Mccapra (talk) 09:10, 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. ✗plicit 14:45, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Real-time Cmix

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

I couldn't find good enough sources to add to show it meets WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 15:34, 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! 08:48, 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. ✗plicit 14:46, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alistair Forrester

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

unnotable darts player, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:24, 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! 08:45, 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. ✗plicit 14:47, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arūnas Čiplys

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

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:43, 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. ✗plicit 14:48, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pete Wilson (wrestler)

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

No notable wrestler. Just worked on an independent level. The article has a few sources, non of them focusing on him, just WP:ROUTINE results. Looking for sources, he only has passing mentions on a few events. 1 . I don't understand how a 2006's version of the article was voted as keep. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:31, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:33, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. None of the coverage in the article (databases and routine coverage of match results) or what I could find with a basic Google search (what's in the article & false positives) support notability. We need more for a BLP. Eluchil404 (talk) 03:57, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:49, 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! 22:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kyosuke Hashimoto

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

Not good enough to meet WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT for this player who spent 464 minutes in Japan's third league. Sources are WP:PRIMARY or WP:ROUTINE/WP:PASSING, especially those in the ja:wiki. Geschichte (talk) 05:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 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! 22:52, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobuhide Akiba

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

Non-compliance with WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. No sources approaching independent and significant, including those in the ja:wiki. Geschichte (talk) 05:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:46, 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! 22:52, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jinyu Nasu

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

Utter failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT, with his 190 minutes of play time in Japan's third league. No sources approaching independent and significant, including those in the ja:wiki. Geschichte (talk) 05:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:45, 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! 22:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keisuke Kumazawa

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

Falls short of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT, his career lasting for 544 minutes. No sources approaching independent and significant, including those in the ja:wiki, which are primary or match reports. Creator is globally locked. Geschichte (talk) 05:04, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:45, 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! 23:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yoshiyuki Okumura

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

Strong failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT, only played 8 games in the third league. No independent and significant sources, including those in ja:wiki. Creator is globally locked. Geschichte (talk) 05:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:43, 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 NASSCOM. asilvering (talk) 00:15, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harish S. Mehta

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

Article is a WP:PROMO, fails WP:GNG, WP:BASIC and WP:BIO. WP:NOTRESUME. Charlie (talk) 04:43, 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! 04:05, 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! 06:38, 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 Jamaican cuisine. (non-admin closure) Reywas92Talk 23:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cuisine of Jamaica

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

This article was redirected to Jamaican cuisine all the way back in 2008 [40] and remained as a redirect right up until 45 minutes ago today, where user @876made literally copypasted the entire redirected article over to here. This is a request to restore the page to its former redirect status. It's completely unnecessary to have two articles about the same thing. Sirocco745 (talk) 05:47, 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 Mark Kotter. Just noting that the target article has also been brought to AFD for a deletion discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 05:03, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bit.bio

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

There does not appear to me to be any independent, reliable, in-depth coverage for this company, as required by WP:NCORP. I have conducted a search I believe to be extensive, though perhaps not comprehensive, and the results are as follows:

Source assessment
Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Secondary? Overall value toward ORGCRIT
All the citations already in the article seem to be pressers except the Forbes contributor and WP:TECHCRUNCH so skipping to:
Reynolds, Matt (2021-12-20). "This Startup Is Making—and Programming—Human Cells". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
 – Yes – Maybe the first sentence of the penultimate paragraph, and the first two of the last, are both directly about the subject and not quotes. No Bit of a stretch to call those three secondary.
"Cambridge Company Bit Bio Presses Enter To The Software Of Life". The Healthcare Technology Report. 2020-06-23. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
 No Seems like WP:TRADES likely paraphrasing a presser to me No idea how reliable
Skipped, quickfail on other criteria
Yes Yes No Namecheck due to quoting founder, no actual coverage No
Google didn't pick up these ones for me for some reason, but:
Bawden, Tom (2020-10-22). "Scientists could make an organ from scratch within a decade after cracking human cell code". i. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
 No Yes No Seems like a routine rehash of PR material to me No
Whipple, Tom (2020-10-27). "Bit.Bio: British firm cracks code for stem cells". The Times. Retrieved 2024-10-20.
 No Yes No Slightly better than the one from i but still routine coverage of the partnership announcement IMO –
No Again, this is 90% quotes Yes No No

(No relevant results were found for Elpis BioMed)

There are, of course, hundreds of other press releases, but I've omitted those for brevity. Additionally, even if appropriate sources meeting NCORP are found for this subject, half of the paragraphs in § Origins are biomedical in nature, which makes the sourcing to press releases instead of actually reliable sources highly inappropriate, and I would advocate that the article be confined to draftspace on those grounds alone (or otherwise removed from indexing). The creator of the article is also a single purpose account, though they have denied a COI. It is possible that they are simply an overly enthusiastic new editor. Also noting I have no objection to a redirect, with or without retaining article history. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC) Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on UPE and related Mark Kotter article
Alpha3031, just a brief note to say that there is abundant off-wiki evidence to indicate that the article creator here is a UPE linked to the company. That being the case, I wonder if you had considered the possibility of also referring the article on Bit.bio founder Mark Kotter to AfD as it is equally promotional and the work of the same UPE user? (I would do so myself but for unfamiliarity with the process of creating an AfD).
Further info on the background can be found at the relevant thread at COIN, here [41]. Kind regards, Axad12 (talk) 05:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I did skim that thread but I missed the part about off-wiki evidence. If that's the case then the paid-en-wp VRT queue may be able to do things that AfD does not normally do, like enforce AfC (or block the editor in question). However, I will make it a priority to conduct a BEFORE for that article as well. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:38, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note. My feeling is that the very easily accessible evidence is so compelling that referral to paid-en-wp should not really be necessary. The user is clearly a promo-only SPA with a disruptive editing pattern who has ignored several warnings. The transparent nature of the UPE should therefore be sufficient for the user to be site blocked.
Thank you for looking at the Mark Kotter article, much appreciated. If the two articles end up being deleted then hopefully that will put an end to the promo/SPA/COI activity around these subjects. Axad12 (talk) 05:51, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On an initial review, I would expect deletion to be an unlikely outcome as Kotter would be measured against WP:NPROF (though I could be wrong, I don't do BIO AfDs as often). On the other hand, WP:BLP applies to positive content as well as negative, so I expect the best path forward would be to exclude any content that seems overly promotional, with the use of either the usual Dispute resolution or blocks and page protection as required, depending on the specific cause of the issue. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Alpha3031 and Axad12: Yep an h-index of 48 is an easy pass of WP:PROF #1. SmartSE (talk) 08:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Smartse, noted. Thank you for the work you have done on the Kotter article to bring it closer in line with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Axad12 (talk) 08:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Very strong delete, as per nom. I'd also request that sanctions be implemented against the creator, who has been asked to declare their transparent UPE/COI status but has refused to do so, and has repeatedly removed COI etc templates from the articles they have created. Axad12 (talk) 05:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Postscript: Given the negative contents of the source assessment table I am against a redirect. The additional source material not covered by the table is apparently sourced to press releases. Once all the various kinds of poor sourcing are stripped out, what is there left to redirect? Axad12 (talk) 09:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A redirect means there will be nothing at the page and anyone trying to go to Bit.bio will be taken to Mark Kotter instead Axad12. Not sure what you mean by what is left, unless I'm misunderstanding something? Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Apologies, I was momentarily (and rather foolishly) confusing 'redirect' with 'merge'. My mistake. Axad12 (talk) 09:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On second thoughts, since the biography is notable, we should probably redirect there. SmartSE (talk) 08:17, 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 by nominator. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jessie Sunner

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

Only a member of a political party, not elected to any legislative body, fails WP:NPOL TheSlumPanda (talk) 04:24, 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 Five Nights at Freddy's. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Afton

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

IMO, this should be redirected, draftified, deleted, or failing all of those things, sourced. Unfortunately, the first two options will likely be reverted by the article creator. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 03:16, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per the points of the others. Unsourced and has little to no content, with no indication of notability shown. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per all. Mostly unsourced, but seems like a clear and valid search term. Shooterwalker (talk) 00:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect A lot of the article is just theoretical. Many of the facts (like how Mike worked at the pizzeria, or how he is the brother of the crying child) are speculative and unconfirmed by the actual franchise. This is what I believe to be the biggest problem with the article. It works better as a search term, in my opinion, as I believe the article about the franchise contains information about the characters. Probably even more than this article…TheSchollyist (talk) 17:17, 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. Liz Read! Talk! 04:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isabella Moore (soprano)

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

Fails WP:GNG. Despite the competition wins, these haven't actually led to any significant work on the concert or opera stage. I could find no reviews of her performances or coverage in independent publications; although I did find media that had connections to the subject and could not be used towards notability because they lacked independence. Her profile in opera base (see https://www.operabase.com/isabella-moore-a2140410/en) which tracks all professional opera productions globally only has one credit, and it isn't even a professional production but a university production. She is involved with the Pegasus Opera Company, but that is only a semi-professional company that operates more like a community theatre organization that a standard opera house. It's productions don't even get tracked by opera base. I think this is possibly a case of WP:TOOSOON, but since she has been at it for over a decade without a significant professional resume she may never achieve notability. 4meter4 (talk) 02:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Alexeyevitch(talk) 07:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Lately, opera singing and academia have become more alike in the sense of perpetual fellowships that delay tenure or its equivalent. I’m not sure if we should be involved in forcing a change to that. Bearian (talk) 01:23, 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.