Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 23

< September 22 September 24 >
Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

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

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Santos Seda

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

Does not meet threshold of WP:Politician Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 23:39, 23 September 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! 23:23, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jitul Sonowal

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Jitul Sonowal (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)

References seem to only be tangentially related to him or just promotional. Several red links to songs. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 23:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Assam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Poor to unreliable sources with no significant coverage on the biography and music career of the subject. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICBIO. No significant and noteworthy achievement by the subject's role as a singer and musician to warrant a page on Wikipedia. RangersRus (talk) 14:10, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per NMUSICBIO: 1. He has not “been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable,” being tangential to the stories in major media; 2. there’s no evidence that he “Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart,” or 3. “Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.” He has never had 4. “international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.” Nor is there any evidence of meeting any other factor. If I’m wrong, please ping me. Bearian (talk) 18:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete can’t find any second party sources focussed on him. The ONE source which comes close is an article saying he had been appointed head of the North East Zone Cultural Center, but even that was super short of detail. Other articles where he gives speeches for the NEZCC are him talking about the center but nothing about him, just the mention that he spoke. This article has also been deleted before I see, I wonder why it was remade? The only thing that would change my mind is as per Bearian, if someone can show us non-English sources for notability. Absurdum4242 (talk) 12:58, 29 September 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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Monument Mythos

[edit]
The Monument Mythos (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)

Appears to fail notability guidelines. Most of the article’s sources are student newspapers by the author’s own description. Could not find reliable significant coverage in my search. Has been previously deleted. StewdioMACK (talk) 09:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Has been previously deleted.... when? Has been previously kept....Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Draft:The_Monument_Mythos... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was kept as a draft. It was nominated for deletion as a draft by a non-good-faith actor. But that is not evidence that there was a consensus that the subject is notable after someone challenged its notability. Drafts are not deleted for lack of notability so a draft being kept does not mean that editors thought that the subject is notable. —Alalch E. 15:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, maybe, but the page was discussed and the then-draft found promising by some users, whereas deletion was NOT discussed, so that stating ’has been previously deleted’ here (an AfD venue, where consensus is what matters) is misleading imv. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that's is misleading. The decision to keep the draft does not matter at all in either direction. —Alalch E. 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, right. The MfD. yikes. Babysharkboss2!! (No Life 'Til Leather) 13:19, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Babysharkboss2!! (Nomad Vagabond) 14:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be helpful if, as one of the contributors to the page, you could find time to explain why you think deletion is not necessary. Thank you in advance. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Babysharkboss2 (pinging you to increase chances you read this). Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yeah. Anyway, this has etiquette enough sources and there are still sources to be added. It survived MfD (Even after one very...passionate user wanted it gone). So i'd like to keep it. Babysharkboss2!! (Nomad Vagabond) 12:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This page puts some major parts of the Monument Mythos right into the first segment. There should be an area marked "Plot" for that. - shJunpei :3 12:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep in addition to the sources cited above it's an exemplar of the emerging subgenre of analog horror. The series just wrapped up last year. In "J-HORROR Y ESTÉTICA VHS EN EL ANALOG HORROR DE YOUTUBE" by Javier Acevedo Nieto,[2] The Monument Mythos is given as an example of the growing popularity of analog horror. There are several articles from reliable sources that are admittedly about ARGs, but give The Monument Mythos a key place in the genre.[3] There are some more niche horror publications that give the series more coverage.[4] The article needs to be cleaned up, but the sources are out there. Ted the Caver was an even more niche online horror series, and it is still being seriously discussed, Rjjiii (talk) 04:03, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rjjiii, it all depends on the existence of reliable sources that can establish notability. Which ones do you believe provides SIGCOV? Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Below are the approximate word counts for just the content explicitly about The Monument Mythos. I checked the sources mentioned here and cited in the article, and left off anything with less than a hundred words about the subject:
The Horror Fam page has about 1,400 words but is more of an editorial. Rjjiii (talk) 05:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge to analog horror. there doesnt seem to be enough secondary sources notability for a seperate article, but it’s solid enough as an example of the genre which has notability itself. In fact, I see it is already given in that article as an example of the genre. No need for the split page. Absurdum4242 (talk) 13:13, 29 September 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. Sorry, I didn't review this AFD again until tonight, didn't see the messages. Liz Read! Talk! 06:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New FM

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

Unsourced since 2010 Golikom (talk) 11:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources I added.

Sources:

  1. Connell, Tim (30 August 2012). "today's topics - Rock classic makes its sound mark". Newcastle Herald. Newcastle: Fairfax Media. p. 13. Retrieved 15 September 2024 – via NewsBank.
    2. The article notes "It was the very first song played on Newcastle's first commercial FM radio station, NEW-FM. ... The station's founder, Mike Webb, chose Long Way to the Top to put his baby to air on April 14, 1989. The new FM player tore off a huge chunk of the ratings at the expense of 2NX, Newcastle's existing hit music station."
  2. Sadlier, Kevin (7 May 1989). "Radio". Television. The Sun-Herald. Sydney: John Fairfax Holdings. p. 116. Retrieved 16 April 2010 – via NewsBank.
    3. The article notes "NEWCASTLE'S newest station, NEW-FM, was officially launched last night with a spectacular pysotechnics/laser/rock show - the largest free entertainment event ever held in the Hunter region, according to NEW's Mike Webb. NEW can be found at 105.3 on the FM band."
  3. Sadlier, Kevin (26 November 1989). "FM Stations Eat Away at Ratings". News and Features. The Sun-Herald. Sydney: John Fairfax Holdings. p. 134. Retrieved 17 April 2010 – via NewsBank.
    4. The article notes: "In Newcastle, NEW-FM began broadcasting only last April. In its first ratings survey, NEW achieved a rating of 24.7."
  4. Joyce, James (14 May 1999). "Birthday blowout for NEW-FM". News. Newcastle Herald. Newcastle: Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited. p. 63. Retrieved 15 September 2024 – via NewsBank.
    5. The article notes: "NEW-FM celebrated its 10th birthday last month. ... Instead of dishing out party favours, new owner Bill Caralis cut costs and staff and flicked the switch to night music networked out of his Lismore station. ... When they left in November 1993 to join Triple M in Adelaide, the failure to find a winning replacement spearheaded the ratings nose-dive that paved the way for 2HD's $2.3million buy-out of NEW's mostly local shareholders in 1994. But after five years of Labor control, NEW is still a long way from the glory of its early years under founder Mike Webb."
  5. Joyce, James (22 March 1999). "NSW Labor signs off with 2HD". News. Newcastle Herald. Newcastle: Newcastle Newspapers Pty Limited. p. 12. Retrieved 15 September 2024 – via NewsBank.
    6. The article notes: "THE NSW Labor Party and Labor Council have handed control of radio stations 2HD and NEW-FM to regional radio mogul Bill Caralis a week before the State election. The outgoing chairman of the Sandgate-based broadcasters, John Price, said Friday's official change of ownership would 'enable the NSW ALP to concentrate on better serving the Hunter community'. The sale price is believed to have been $12.5million"
  6. Day, Mark (10 February 2000). "Mystery mogul of radio". News. The Australian. Sydney: News Limited. p. M12. Retrieved 15 September 2024 – via NewsBank.
    7. The article notes: "He has spent an estimated $40 million in the past 12 months on additional licences and a state-of-the-art broadcast centre, and is the force behind a shake-up of commercial radio. So, asks Mark Day, who is Bill Caralis? ... While Caralis's Broadcast Operations Pty Ltd is a private company, he has every right to tell us all to go to hell. ... He stunned the radio industry last year when he bought two Newcastle stations -- NEW FM and 2HD -- from the NSW Labor Council for more than $11 million, double the 'Bill will need to have deep pockets' value ascribed to them less than a year earlier."

There is sufficient coverage in multiple reliable sources to allow the subject to pass the general notability guideline, requiring "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". --Yours sincerely, Bas (or TechGeek105) (talk to me) 01:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. A review of these new sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:18, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. I see a consensus to Delete this article. Liz Read! Talk! 22:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bafakhy Yatheemkhana

[edit]
Bafakhy Yatheemkhana (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 cannot find WP:SIGCOV of this charitable organization in WP:SIRS for a pass of WP:GNG or WP:NORG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:08, 23 September 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. Sourcing has been found to be insufficient depth and independence. Star Mississippi 01:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rouzbeh Rafie

[edit]
Rouzbeh Rafie (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:COMPOSER. None of the sources here establish WP:GNG notability, either on account of not being independent (personal website, profile at Ulysses platform, which appears to allow self published pages, Ermes 404 a publisher of his music, an interview with Rafie), reliable (wordpress blog) or significant (pretty much all the other sources).

Criterion 3 of COMPOSER states that those who have written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. may be notable, but none of the competitions he has won appear to be "major" (at the very least, they don't have Wikipedia articles) Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few more reliable independent sources (e.g. Association of Iranian Contemporary Music Composers (ACIMC)).
In my opinion, Rafie meets criteria for Wikipedia:NMUSICOTHER, saying "Composers and performers outside mass media traditions may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria: Has composed a number of notable melodies, tunes, or standards used in a notable music genre."
The competitions are notable from my point of view, especially considering the small world of contemporary experimental (classical) music. E.G. a festival like MUSEQUAL https://www.kokonainenfestival.fi/?lang=en has a very good reputation, even without a wiki article Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 08:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Klaviermusikfan1972 None of the sources you added move the needle with regard to being independent and in-depth. (for example this is a profile on the website of an organization Rafie is a member of).
Rafie does not meet that criterion of NMUSICOTHER, because a "notable" composition is one that qualifies for an article, by having sources cover it. None of Rafie's originals have gotten that. Mach61 17:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we need more participation here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added another independen reliable source from the "Bach&Now Festival", where Rafie was chosen Artist-in-Residence. https://bachandnow.de/en/composer-in-residence/ Hopefully this will help to keep the article! Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 15:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Klaviermusikfan1972 This profile is written by Rafie (As “Composer in Residence” of the Bach & now! festival, I am thrilled to share my musical journey and artistic vision with you. Mach61 19:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From my point of view, the fact that he was chosen artist in residence by the festival including three commissioned world premiere compositions, proofs that he is a notable composer. I checked the imprint, and Rafie is not a member of the festival board, festival founder or anything else. So it's at least an independent source. Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 20:24, 20 September 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! 23:00, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to find some more independent secondary sources and added them to the article. https://aleph-fdn.com/directory/rouzbeh-rafie/ https://www.alexandra-sostmann.de/projects_e.html and an article from the italian newspaper "La Nazione" on winning the "Ennio Porrino Competition" and his composition "Chaconne". Hope this will help to prove that he is a serious composer and to keep the Wiki article! Thanks! Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 08:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.lanazione.it/grosseto/cronaca/premio-porrino-serata-finale-e-proclamazione-del-vincitore-rouzbeh-rafie-vn53mvj2 Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 09:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Klaviermusikfan1972 Aleph is an organization that organizes composing evens, including some Rafie participated in. Not independent. Alexandra Sostmann is a pianist who worked with Rafie; ibid.
I will grant that the La Nazione article is unambigiously an independent, reliable source, and though it doesn't discuss Rafie in much depth, it does seem to confirm that the Ennio Porrino is major for WP:COMPOSER purposes. With that being said, the notability criteria for musicians are not absolute (Please note that... meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept), and for reasons explained below I still believe the article should be deleted.
One reason Wikipedia has notability criterion, as explained at WP:WHYN:

We require that all articles rely primarily on "third-party" or "independent sources" so that we can write a fair and balanced article that complies with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and to ensure that articles are not advertising a product, service, or organization. See Wikipedia:Autobiography for discussion of neutrality concerns of self-published sources.

Ultimately, it remains that there no entity independent of Rafie has bothered to cover his actions in any depth, meaning that any article about him must be based on his own word (that you've included a bunch of redundant biographies from affiliated organizations that are clearly based on his personal webpage doesn't change this fact). Mach61 23:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to emphasize once again that a large part of the article is not only based on biographical information, but is also clearly supported by additional independent sources:
  • Performances of his works at international festivals
  • Artist in Residence at international festivals
  • Awards at international composition competitions
  • Performances and recordings of his works by international artists
  • Publication of his works on international CD productions
  • Publication of his works in sheet music form
What kind of sources are otherwise required to independently verify certain stages in his biography? Does he have to submit his university diploma if a festival wants to publish his biography on the festival's website?
The article can certainly be improved! If there are passages that are not sufficiently sourced, the Wikipedia community can remove them, no problem. But I cannot understand at all the claim that Rafie does not have enough sufficient references to justify a Wikipedia article. Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 11:08, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Klaviermusikfan1972 An inependent source is simply one that isn't produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. I have exhaustively shown why almost none of the sources in the article are actually independent of Rafie, and will not bother to argue in circles about it. Mach61 02:52, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Virtually none of those qualify as secondary sources, which are required to show notability on Wikipedia. WP:SECONDARY:

A secondary source provides thought and reflection based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources.

CDs, sheet music, awards, performances, and musical recordings are all primary sources. Based on your argument, any person who has ever recorded music and put it on a CD would qualify for a Wikipedia article, and that's simply not how Wikipedia works. Left guide (talk) 13:16, 29 September 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. Suggest discussion on NFF wording continue elsewhere and be clarified, if needed. Star Mississippi 01:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diablo (upcoming film)

[edit]
Diablo (upcoming film) (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)

Unreleased film, not expected to release until 2025. Does not meet WP:NFF or WP:SIGCOV, and won't until release. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It should be created on release day. AutorisedUser673 (talk) 17:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If that is a joke, that’s funny. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reminder that "filming complete" is the requirement for films that don't have independently notable production, and doesn't in itself mean that we need a standalone article on the film yet. Are there reasons to keep beyond "meets the bare minimum"?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 22:56, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused. The general requirement for films that don't have independently notable production (ie films meeting NFF), is that filming has begun, not the wrapping of filming (which implies it has started, obviously). Or did you mean something else? As for "meets the bare minimum", well, I am not sure this is strictly the case, but if it is, then, what's the issue? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:17, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The state of filming is unimportant (and I'm not sure why it's included in the NFF statement Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines.) - it's clearly just confusing. The important detail is that absent the production somehow being significant, the film a) needs to have been released, and b) otherwise satisfies WP:N via WP:SIGCOV in independent WP:RS. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
??????? Then change the guideline. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:25, 25 September 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 23:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vasiljka Jezovšek

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2019. Only source is to bachcantatas which is a website anyone can edit and is unreliable. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ok to delete, though I have added sources and removed most of the extraneous detail sourced to her biography on the Bach Cantatas Website, so it reads like less of a CV or promotional article. Does not meet WP:GNG. Despite a couple of favorable mentions in The Times (including the one from 1996 now quoted and cited within the article, which is likely one of her most positive reviews), in general there is a dearth of coverage found in English or German over the course of her career (only 10 hits on ProQuest, most of which turn out to be mentions), and the one recording review in Rondo magazine is quite negative, such that I would imagine if it were up to her she probably wouldn't think it was worth having a Wikipedia article if she had to see it quoted there. Please ping me if anyone finds additional coverage. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. asilvering (talk) 22:22, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

British army in the Eureka Rebellion

[edit]
British army in the Eureka Rebellion (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)

Unnecessary content fork. Content could easily be merged into Eureka Rebellion and List of Eureka Stockade defenders. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 16:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is pretty extensive so I'd prefer a bit more confirmation that deletion is the right call here over any possible WP:ATD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 22:50, 23 September 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; speedy keep‎. (non-admin closure) Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Wojtanik

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Andrew Wojtanik (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)

After 18 years on Wikipedia, this individual appears still to be a WP:BLP1E. No WP:SIGCOV outside one event in 2004, so no WP:GNG pass, and unlikely to clear WP:NACADEMIC. Winning the National Geography Bee seems unlikely to be a WP:ANYBIO #1 pass, since he is the only winner to have had a page created in 30+ years of this competition's history. Finally, I find no reviews in independent, reliable sources for Wojtanik's book, making a pass on WP:NAUTHOR unlikely. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. asilvering (talk) 22:23, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diario Paraguay-Rundschau

[edit]
Diario Paraguay-Rundschau (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 meet notability criteria. Could not find any mentions to this paper anywhere else on the internet. Coeusin (talk) 21:52, 23 September 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. asilvering (talk) 22:24, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Janssen

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this footballer. Seems WP:TOOSOON for an article at the moment as all I found was this routine transactional announcement. JTtheOG (talk) 20:50, 23 September 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 Polar Beverages without prejudice against a selective merge of sourced, encyclopedic content. Please let me or another admin know if the disruptive editing continues, so that a page protection or partial block will be applied. Owen× ☎ 22:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aspire (Energy)

[edit]
Aspire (Energy) (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 advertorial article on an energy drink does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for corporations/businesses WP:NCORP, lacking WP:CORPDEPTH the citations are either primary sources, blogs, or press-release type PR. The product itself does not meet WP:GNG. I think it's PROMO. Netherzone (talk) 20:48, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find something of worth in that mess, by all means add a section there. But the article itself should go. - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 06:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sp please by all means get rid of it, and just wanted to lyk its just an article not the declaration of independence so the fact that y'all are taking it this serious is wild, listen I want the page gone as well, this page wasn't a PR stunt, I was very excited about the thought of creating my own article, I'm sorry. TheJodeciadams (talk) 12:26, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I feel this article has the opportunity to be improved, I've been trying the past couple of days to improve upon it, and I will continue to do so, I believe this article deserves a chance, drink articles can also be informative and knowledgeable.

TheJodeciadams (talk) 06:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And no, I'm not creating this article based on promoting the product, I just want people to be aware of stuff like this, there wasnt a page on it and the drink has been out for 14 years I just thought it was time. And I see so many other article with little to no references and Promo content that have been on wiki for a long time and still are on here TheJodeciadams (talk) 11:14, 30 September 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 Hindi films of 1973. Owen× ☎ 22:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ek Mutthi Aasmaan

[edit]
Ek Mutthi Aasmaan (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 Latin script)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Hindi script)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFILM. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 20:44, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 22:24, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heera Nagar

[edit]
Heera Nagar (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)

Reviewed during NPP. With GNG clearly not a possibility, Ngeo is the only possibility. Of the two references, one is only about linguistics put in to support a general linguistics statement. (i.e. not about the subject) The other source is a short article about a court case about non-residential building being built in a residential neighborhood, and that article refers to this as a residential area. A google map search yields a zillion Heera Nagar's, so it's apparently common to name residential areas "Heera Nagar" possibly based on linguistics.

There is nothing in the sources that supports any of the specific statements in the article regarding the subject. I'm not talking about this in a wp:ver context. I'm saying that all of the statements about it as being an entity are unsourced except for the lawsuit referring to it as a residential area. North8000 (talk) 20:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Owen× ☎ 22:23, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ling Racing

[edit]
Ling Racing (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 don't see any pass for this subject on WP:NSPORT or WP:GNG. The source for virtually all of this content is stats pages (making most of the narrative original research), and there's no WP:SIGCOV of this racing team that I can find in my WP:BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:20, 23 September 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 accidents and incidents involving the Convair CV-240 family. Issues with sourcing can be discussed on the target's Talk page. Owen× ☎ 22:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1977 Aviateca Convair 240 crash

[edit]
1977 Aviateca Convair 240 crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable incident with zero fatalities nor injuries, along with lack of citations. Lolzer3k 18:34, 23 September 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! 17:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2019 New York City helicopter crash

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
2019 New York City helicopter crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable run of the mill incident. Singular fatality and little to no notable damage to Axa Equitable Center. Even if a final report turns out of this and a major issue is found, this would most likely wrap into a seperate article. Lolzer3k 18:11, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to The Bachelor (American TV series) season 1. Liz Read! Talk! 17:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Michel

[edit]
Alex Michel (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)

Notable for only being the main character of The Bachelor (American TV series) season 1. Rest of his accomplishments don't reach par up to notability level, especially post-Bachelor ones. Should be redirected to the season page if not deleted. One or more of the following should apply: WP:BIO1E, WP:BLP1E, WP:PAGEDECIDE, WP:BIODELETE. George Ho (talk) 17:15, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article should be deleted as they didn't meet any WP:GNG, enough reliable references and nominations would have make them stay Tesleemah (talk) 20:15, 23 September 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. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 15:37, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jarius Page

[edit]
Jarius Page (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:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. Promo article for a BLP. References are profiles, about us pages, blog entries and an interview. No indication of significance. scope_creepTalk 16:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am unable to see anything notable about the subject in the article, and a web search didn't turn up anything non-promotional. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:42, 23 September 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! 15:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marius Chelaru (writer)

[edit]
Marius Chelaru (writer) (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 particular indication of notability here. The subject has participated in some random conferences, which hardly makes him encyclopedically notable.

As a side note, someone should look more closely at the article creator and his activity. He seems deeply involved with an obscure movement called Empathism (do check out that article, though fair warning: your eyes may hurt), and has been creating stubs about even more obscure figures associated with this supposed literary current.

Anyway, to return to Chelaru: nothing about his record, and certainly not the mediocre sources, suggests that he should have an article here. Thus, delete. Biruitorul Talk 15:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged the "empathism" article for clean-up, it's too wordy and over-quoted for what it's trying to day. Oaktree b (talk) 15:58, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete it falls dangerously below WP:GNG and all other known notability guidelines. Even his listed works do not mention him and the works do not have tittles, where they were published and their identifiers such as ISBN, ISSN. Piscili (talk) 16:00, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - this article on a non-notable writer fails WP:GNG and WP:NAUTHOR. This article is one of a series of promotional articles (a walled garden of sorts) surrounding the so-called Empathism "movement" and the poet Menotti Lerro (who "invented" Empathism and wrote it's manifesto), and the "award" given to the people who adhere to Empathism. Other articles of questionable notability are the other "members" as well as Lerro's Cilento International Poetry Prize and others that I do not have the time at the moment to add. Two SPA's are creating numerous articles that all connect back to Lerro (hence the "walled garden"), whose article on Italian Wikipedia has been deleted for lack of notability. The whole group of articles are WP:PROMO. Netherzone (talk) 01:41, 24 September 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 RealNetworks. Liz Read! Talk! 15:28, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RealDownloader

[edit]
RealDownloader (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 notable in the slightest. Has had an additional citations tag and a notability tag since 2013. Only sources I found are from Q&A forums and the only sources on the article don't help to establish notability. ― Blaze WolfTalkblaze__wolf 15:12, 23 September 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 Central counterparty clearing. Malinaccier (talk) 13:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CCP Global

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

There is insufficient WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS for this subject to pass WP:NORG. The references are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS, WP:PRIMARYSOURCES, or affiliated sources and the same applies for sources found in WP:BEFORE search. As an AtD, I propose a redirect to Central counterparty clearing. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was draftify‎. ✗plicit 11:04, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tobiáš Diviš

[edit]
Tobiáš Diviš (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 cannot find any evidence of notability for this Slovak men's footballer to meet WP:GNG. He only played 48 matches in lower leagues. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftify or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify: While they don't seem notable at the moment, they could 100% have coverage around them in the future. Article seems in okay shape, so I'd rather move it to draftspace where it can be worked on rather that a flat-out deletion. SirMemeGod  17:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The article is nominated for deletion by the base it fails WP:GNG. References are poorly-formatted too. I don't think Diviš will gain any significant coverage in the future, since the clubs he has played for are certainly not well-known outside Slovakia, but of course we won't make WP:CRYSTALBALL predictions. In its current state, the article is written like a database or directory and does not contain anything about what Diviš accomplished to prove that he deserves a Wikipedia article. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The clubs don't need to be well-known outside of Slovakia. We only need reliable sources from within Slovakia. Being notable in one location is enough for an entry in the English Wikipedia. How the references are formatted is not a reason for deletion. Geschichte (talk) 07:18, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify per above. Active first-tier player who has also made his U21 international debut, there is coverage at the moment but not significant enough yet. I am also bewildered by some of the statements by the nominator. Geschichte (talk) 07:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of Michael Mohn

[edit]
Killing of Michael Mohn (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 feels like a violation of WP:NOTNEWS Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 07:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For evaluation of the content added.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: not likely meeting criminal notability; I can only find coverage from this past February when he was also facing terrorism charges... Then silence. Strange crime, but the media seems to have moved on. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:22, 23 September 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 11:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking Ape Blues

[edit]
Thinking Ape Blues (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 wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. toweli (talk) 11:06, 23 September 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 11:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doppelganger Week

[edit]
Doppelganger Week (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:PERSISTENCE, it looks like it was only the February 2010 event that received any press coverage. I can find a February 2019 video where a morning TV show celebrates a "National Doppelganger Week", but they don't seem to be framing it as part of an internet meme. Belbury (talk) 09:50, 23 September 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 11:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vighnesh Pande

[edit]
Vighnesh Pande (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)

Clearly fails WP:GNG, just some routine coverage. Youknow? (talk) 09:40, 23 September 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 Finsbury railway line. ✗plicit 11:47, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woodville North railway station

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

Despite the name, this wasn't an actual public train station. From the article: "Due to the line being for industrial purposes, it never really carried actual passenger train services apart from some trains that were scheduled for the workers" although this isn't cited to anything. The existing sources are useless; one is a single word mention that doesn't even support the content it is cited to, and the other is a YouTube video. A basic BEFORE search did not turn up anything promising. At best, this could be redirected to Finsbury railway line. Pygos (talk) 09:22, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:10, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ehraz Ahmad

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

Repeatedly recreated and already full salted at Ehraz Ahmed, appears to have been created under this title to circumvent the salting. Tagged for G4 for an administrator to check if it was the same as the deleted version, as, despite most sources having a retrieval date of 2024-09-21, they were much older and possibly already in use at the time. Speedy was declined twice by an IP, so here we are again. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 08:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Should be speedied in case the original author is a sock. I also believe this is a case of undisclosed paid editing: promotional tone, lots of weasel words, as well as a mixture of reliable and unreliable sources. In case this person is actually notable, I suggest TNT-ing. A09|(talk) 09:06, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 08:10, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Veterans Benefits Administration regional offices

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

Fails WP:NLIST - Wikipedia is not a directory for listing government's regional offices (that's what the Department's website is for - no indication any of these offices are remotely notable. Dan arndt (talk) 08:22, 23 September 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 Aeroflot accidents and incidents in the 1950s. Liz Read! Talk! 04:54, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Flight 31

[edit]
Aeroflot Flight 31 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: A search reveals that there exists no (significant) news coverage of the event, no secondary sources, no in-depth coverage, no continued coverage, no demonstrated lasting effects and no long-term impact on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Aeroflot accidents and incidents in the 1950s. There was some information in the article missing from the table, but I've already copied it over. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:47, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 04:55, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davood Noroozi

[edit]
Davood Noroozi (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 inherent notability, fails WP:GNG, WP:NPOL or WP:ANYBIO. BEFORE was not productive. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 23:15, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Smyrna, Decatur County, Indiana

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

A 4tgh class post office, not a town. There's almost nothing there, and what little there is was mostly built in the 1950s. Mangoe (talk) 13:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something wrong with being built in the 1950's? Of the "almost nothing", does that indicate there is actually something there? — Maile (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are two modern houses and one older, with no obvious relationship to each other. Three houses vaguely near each other is not a town, and in any case the name of the spot is much older. Mangoe (talk) 12:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I can't believe I have to ask this, but, as this place seems to be existent, just very obscure, should this article be kept just for the sake of completeness of Decatur County, Indiana? It's obviously not up to WP:NGEO, but so are many of the other articles in Decatur County, Indiana, like Knarr Corner, Indiana and New Pennington, Indiana. Deleting this would mean that many other articles of similar quality should be deleted. I recognize this situation similar to that discussed in Wikipedia talk:Notability#RfC: Notability and British Rail stations. Is this place notable just for existing? What do you think? Pygos (talk) 11:39, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem, as detained in WP:GNIS, is that its compilers read names off maps fairly indiscriminately, resulting in the "creation" of a lot of "places" that aren't really there. Completeness is thus a problem target because when we ask "completeness of what?" we already have an answer in WP:GEOLAND. Mangoe (talk) 02:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A few houses existing in the vicinity of a GNIS-scraped place name does not a town make. JoelleJay (talk) 15:34, 26 September 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 05:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nyrika Holkar

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

A promotional biography of a businesswoman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:ADMASQ, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. TCBT1CSI (talk) 12:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:23, 23 September 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 05:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Pan

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

There doesn't seem to be significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. toweli (talk) 08:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:21, 23 September 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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:22, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Art of Sound (exhibition)

[edit]
The Art of Sound (exhibition) (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)

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: further expansion of the article and context was needed. AlphaLemur (talk) 01:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:19, 23 September 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 14:47, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tanha Dar Mazrae

[edit]
Tanha Dar Mazrae (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 reliable sources (a.k.a. no wiki links) and no reliable reviews. This may fail Wikipedia:Notability (films). This article about a short film is short because no other sources exist.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayeye Penhan. I am also nominating the following related page because it is also is sourced by a similar website (akhbarrasmi, is it notable?):

Seyed Mohammad Mousavi Noor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) DareshMohan (talk) 07:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, no participation so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this movie in Iranian cinema.
Khosli is attractive and spectacular and this movie has found many fans.
In our opinion, Iranians, this is the best movie in the Middle East, and if there is a little source now, it is because this movie has just been waiting and the article will gradually mature and grow, and I ask you not to show too much sensitivity on this issue and let it remain an article to avoid wiki law. 5.233.227.181 (talk) 17:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article should stay in English Wikipedia 5.233.231.50 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. Then I suggest to Drafitfy this and you can improve it, please. Some sources exist in the corresponding article in ParsiArabic (or sources you might have found in Persian). And ImDB says it is a short......that is 4 hours ad 10 minutes long..... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC) (edited, thanks, Svartner :D)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relisting, not much participation thus far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:16, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added my !vote above, as a reply. Hope it's not too confusing. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
!Thanks! will correct my blunder.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:35, 23 September 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 Power sector of Andhra Pradesh. Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Corporation Limited

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Single ref is effectively WP:OR. No indication of significance. scope_creepTalk 06:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We will go through your new references to check them. scope_creepTalk 19:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It states here: [19]] that the electricity generators were deregulated in 1999. The main monolithic supplier APSEB was split into a grid supplier and the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited. The regional generator were split off from this organisation into regional supplier. They are all owned by Andhra Pradesh government. Even though they are seperate companies, they can be one article, because all companies are owned by one entity. scope_creepTalk 16:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    10s of companies are owned by Andhra Pradesh state government, it is still unfair and doesn't make sense to merge, just because they are owned by the same party. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:23, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same comment as the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus is still unclear here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:14, 23 September 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 Power sector of Andhra Pradesh. Star Mississippi 00:56, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company Limited

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

Fails WP:NCORP. No indication of significance. scope_creepTalk 06:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewikizoomer: If you don't stop WP:BLUDGEONing every comment that made has been made on this, I will take you to WP:ANI. scope_creepTalk 16:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This appears like a personal attack, accusing other users of doing something that they are not and within accordance with Wikipedia policies is personal attack. I can take you to WP:ANI and instead of threatening, you can directly take it there. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:20, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Scope creep FYI... Thewikizoomer is a politically exposed editor, presumably hired or paid by the current Government of Andhra Pradesh. Their edit history is quite openly visible. It looks like taking the ANI route is the only viable option. Charlie (talk) 17:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It states here: [20] that the electricity generators were deregulated in 1999. The main monolithic supplier APSEB was split into a grid supplier and the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited. The regional generator were split off from this organisation into regional supplier. They are all owned by Andhra Pradesh government. Even though they are seperate companies, they can be one article, because all companies are owned by one entity. scope_creepTalk 16:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    10s of companies are owned by Andhra Pradesh state government, it is still unfair and doesn't make sense to merge, just because they are owned by the same party. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same comment as the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus is still unclear here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. The Delete views carry significantly more P&G weight than the Keep ones, resulting in a rough consensus. Owen× ☎ 18:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chimele Usuwa Abengowe

[edit]
Chimele Usuwa Abengowe (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)

Firstly, the content on ref 1 which is a magazine can't be verified by any reliable source same as ref 5. Ref 2 and ref 5 are also the same link on the article current state. The only source here was this which just only talk about his death. Ref 7 which is a YouTube video showcasing a church service cant be use as a source neither any YouTube link can be use as a source. Ref 3 which just only mentioned his name as part of the medical list and not like he was talked about. Subject just totally fails WP:GNG. Gabriel (……?) 01:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

welcome again for marking another article of mine for deletion. After the last episode, you should have recused yourself from my articles and leave other editors to go through and arrive at their own conclusions. Cfaso2000 (talk) 05:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Subject satisfies notability guidelines as have been severally outlined above. Cfaso2000 (talk) 13:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One source ain't enough to justify notability. Other editors needs to be aware ‘Cfaso2000’ was the article creator. Gabriel (……?) 11:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is a disagreement over the quality of sourcing. A source assessment at this point would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Seems to me he has distinguished service. Notable award too methinks.Unfortunate coverage isn’t wider. 102.91.4.54 (talk) 18:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should have just created an account to vote a keep. All this keep from newbies are now just suspicious. Gabriel (……?) 18:18, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Been here for 12 yrs. 102.91.4.54 (talk) 19:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : Subject meet WP:Notable and there are enough references to back it up Tesleemah (talk) 08:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: The sources provided are not enough to meet WP:GNG. VisionAfrica seems to be the most in-depth, but I could not verify its reliability - it's not listed on the RS Noticeboard. There's no WP:SIGCOV to justify an article at this time.DesiMoore (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • You don't just make claims, @Tesleemah. You may need to present the sources you're speaking of. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: SOURCE ANALYSIS:
    1. Vision Africa is an unreliable source per WP:NGRS. ✗ Fail
    2. gazettes.africa is an archive of the government gazettes of African countries, hence, it's reliable and correctly defined the content. ✓ Pass
    3. I will conder BLERF as reliable because it's been published by Nyaknno Osso, but it lacks indepth coverage and it's a listing of primary generated information. In other words, a database cannot be used as a source. ✗ Fail
    4. It lists medical practitioners registered in Nigeria, but it wasn't independent of Jim, and doesn't show his career. It was only a list. ✗ Fail
    5.Same as source 1
    6. same as source 3
    7. Without having doubts, and although Independent Newspaper (Nigeria) is reliable, the article reads like a paid publication. It's a coverage and statements by the organization who made a statue/thereabout for him.✗ Fail
    8. YouTube is unreliable and the source (username that it was gotten from) of the video is very very unreliable ✗ Fail
    Final analysis: being awarded an award may meet WP:ANYBIO. However, all these SNGs are ways to know that there may exist likely coverage about the person. Here, there is no coverage (significant) of this individual. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:26, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @SafariScribeThanks for your source analysis. I have concerns regarding No 7 analysis. Your statement "the organization who made a statue/thereabout for him" appears to attribute the statue to the organization mentioned in the article. This is not the case based on my reading of the article again. Nowhere in the Independent Newspaper(Nigeria) article was it mentioned that the organization created a statue for him, and I haven't found that in any other sources analysed above. The organization mentioned in this article immortalized him by naming their lecture/conference series after the subject. Regarding being a paid publication, I'm not sure about that. The subject was resting on his deathbed and an organization "probably sponsored" news articles about him, or another probability is "they attracted news attention" to his death. I really can't vouch for any organization regarding how news content emanated. But I would give the benefit of doubt, given that the subject was deceased, and being a prominent person, would attract some coverage. Whether the coverage is facilitated or not is uncertain. I don't think this source should be considered as having failed. Cfaso2000 (talk) 12:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Cfaso2000, about source 7, see WP:PRSOURCE. Best, Reading Beans 08:38, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. ✗plicit 05:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Skagit Environmental Endowment Commission

[edit]
Skagit Environmental Endowment Commission (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:NCORP for not having significant coverage of independent, reliable sources for verification. Cassiopeia talk 00:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:13, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dhiraj Sonawane

[edit]
Dhiraj Sonawane (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)

Moved to mainspace, perhaps before it is ready. I certainly do not see any pass of WP:NPROF here. The best sources in the article look like human interest coverage of surgeries by the subject, and I think they fall a bit short of WP:BASIC. My search did not find much more. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 05:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Medicine, and India. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 05:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. This is a malformed AfD Apparently the page is being targeted for deletion because the page had so many bugs it was straight up targeted for AFD instead of being cleaned and fixed a lot. should consider why the page is being targeted for deletion. which the article subject easily meets, is WP:GNG India Today has significant coverage in reliable sources such as the India Today newspaper also Passes WP:NGEO I don't believe the nominator checked all sources. However, there does appear to be in-depth coverage in sources which I assess as probably reliable, covering multiple events / aspects of this WP:BLP.Monophile 💬 11:58, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The article makes no claim to notability - he runs a department at a hospital, no named chair professorship, nothing showing he's a big player within his discipline. I have reviewed all the citations and see nothing but routine mentions and quotes, other than what looks like a complex spine surgery case (but WP:BLP1E suggests this would need to have lasting impact). GScholar shows some papers with low citation counts (there's a DP Sonawane who has some high-citation counts, but U.S. based and unlikely to be this gentleman).
    @Monophile you should spend some time familiarizing yourself with the various notability policies and guidelines especially those for living persons and professors. Had you done this you'd probably agree the deletion rationale is clear. Continuing to create these articles may be a waste of time, both yours and other editors', if the article subjects are unable to meet notability rules. Oblivy (talk) 07:30, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Now it can be see that both the users, @Oblivy, @Russ Woodroofe are being targeted this page will be created from my account. It can be clearly seen in the previous AFD how they like to target and vote for delete pages.here It is with great regret that I have to say There are Millions of editors and users on Wikipedia, they should get a chance to review the page and see how it is done. The page is targeted without checking the references without checking the page itself These users should be stopped from doing this continuously, this is the urine of Vandalism is being done continuously on Wikipedia etc. of their account edits here, here are checked, they are just constantly targeting this pages. Continuously targeting a page should not be acceptable on Wikipedia. It is a violation of Wikipedia's guidelines. Monophile 💬 01:17, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Every editor has the right to give his opinion on AFD lmatters, the manner in which two User @Oblivy, @Russ Woodroofe target some Pages is tantamount to disrupting the Wikipedia." Monophile 💬 02:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Page reads as resume and WP:PROMO page. The subject has not made any significant achievement notable, nationally or internationally, to warrant a page on him. Fails WP:NPROF. RangersRus (talk) 11:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Monophile: the image used in the article is a posed photo of Sonawane, which you uploaded to Commons at File:Dhiraj Sonawane.jpg as your own work. What's your connection with Mr. Sonawane please? Wikishovel (talk) 12:59, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Alternate explanation, common for this sort of situation, is that it was stolen from social-media or a similar site. But we do need an immediate and clear explanation from the uploader on commons (need to keep license concerns on that site) or it will be promptly deleted. DMacks (talk) 13:08, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. None of the reliable sources here provide any in-depth information about Sonawane as a person, they are all either about his surgeries or his comments as an expert on medical topics. Had those surgeries been made on high-profile individuals (like federal politicians or other important figures), or even received more in-depth coverage by high-quality reliable sources, I would probably have leaned more to keeping, but the current sources are pretty run-off-the-mill. Badbluebus (talk) 17:21, 23 September 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. Speedily closed per consensus and nominator's withdrawal. (non-admin closure) Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 17:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iyana-Iba, Lagos State

[edit]
Iyana-Iba, Lagos State (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 does not meet WP:GNG and No significance importance aside they are opened by a former president, all references are not significant coverage of the subject Tesleemah (talk) 04:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator Following further information and discussion, the article might stand for now with some improvement Tesleemah (talk) 04:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment : This now looks like another frustrated newbie on wikipedia. Like common what do you guys take Wikipedia for? Where you come to create war zone?. People like you have been warned here by @Timtrent:, @Reading Beans: and @Star Mississippi:. You can also listen to the advice of @Liz: at here because your similar behavioural act happened here which I won't be explaining to you further as its a waste of time. You just have to go and read that AFD and understand too well what WP: GEOFEAT says about. You should be busy trying to provide reasonable source to your article De General than making no sense of yourself. "aside they are opened by a former president" You are the one who said that statement. Don't that still sound notable to you as per WP:NGEO. I believe for you to say such you have a source to that. Beside, Iyana-Iba in Lagos State is a populated and legalised area. I hope one day to take a picture of that place soon. Cheers and this is my last statement to you on this AFD. No time for pointless arguments. --Gabriel (……?) 10:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You can also visit my user page if you are interested at looking at the beautiful places of pictures I have taken. Cheers. Gabriel (……?) 10:12, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I saw them. Cheers! Tesleemah (talk) 10:37, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There wasn’t any reason to ping me though but FWIW, Iyana-Iba (where this should be) passes NPLACE, IMO and this nomination seems to be, yet, another bad faith nomination. Best, reading beans 10:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Reading Beans Should the closer interpret this as an opinion either to keep or as a speedy keep? It would help if you would say explicitly what you summaries your thoughts as. Article title can be handled later. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Timtrent, this is a speedy keep on my end. Sources found in a WPBEFORE attempt satisfies NPLACE. The nominator is not knowledgeable enough on relevant criteria's and seems to be unwilling to learn. Best, reading beans 13:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe you had mistaken this AfD to be opened by another editor you had issue with previously.
    This was in good faith as I even supported your AfD here, I can't find where we had been on logheads over here or anywhere else. So I will imploy you to be calm.
    Perhaps the article should be merged with the main subject Lagos as the references were not major cover of the subject, see the following references you added this and this. How is RTEAN and fire outbreak related to the road? Tesleemah (talk) 10:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t care about support on an AfD and I’m just seeing that. You have to say your mind on what is right without doing anything in favor of the nominator. Also your reason for a merge is still pointless. The lekki, Mainland, Ajah and so on that was talked about on the Lagos State article don’t they have an article of their own?. You should just say we should start merging all the Lagos market to Lagos State article because of a pointless reason. Even the Alaba International Market was never mentioned in the Lagos State article despite its a well known popular area. You mentioned a statement above of which I believe they are sources you must have seen to say such, so add them to the article as it’s a part of improvement to the article. this also satisfies. Iyana-iba it’s not just a road. it’s also a market place and the Lagos State University lies in there. Why I’m I even saying this much to a Yoruba lady who is supposed to know this. Go and do your research and have a lovely day. Gabriel (……?) 12:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also talking about being calm, of course I am with my Cannabis looking forward to a better days. Gabriel (……?) 12:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll let the discussion run its course but please bear in mind I don't have any grudges against you Tesleemah (talk) 12:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep: This place passes all the relevant criteria for notability for a geographic element. It would save time were the nominator to choose to withdraw, otherwise I suppose we'll have to plough on for a while 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:02, 23 September 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! 03:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Max Trejo

[edit]
Max Trejo (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 two professional games in MLS Next Pro and now plays for a university. Everything I could find from a Google search was related directly to his career at Ohio State University (almost all of it coming from OSU match reports and write ups). At this point, it looks like this fails WP:GNG. Anwegmann (talk) 02:30, 23 September 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. I see a consensus to Keep this article. To the nominator, please do not nominate an article for an AFD discussion if you are just looking to improve the article's content and sourcing. That can happen outside of a deletion discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Metal Storm (webzine)

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Metal Storm (webzine) (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)

OK, this seems to be something of a borderline notability case. I'm nominating this because there may be decent sourcing that exists to establish notability, but also because this could potentially wind up getting deleted in the end. There was no consensus about this article at AfD back in 2008, but many of the "keep" votes from back then could only cite things like Google search results and sponsorships (see WP:INHERITED), when not just resorting to copouts with WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Most of the sources cited are WP:PRIMARY, and I can't find much information about this site via Google outside of unreliable, WP:NOTRSMUSIC databases. I'm not saying this positively needs to go, but if it's going to stay, it needs serious improvements. But for now, I would like to invite other people to comment with what they think. JeffSpaceman (talk) 01:55, 23 September 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 football clubs in India#Kerala. Liz Read! Talk! 01:13, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Real Malabar FC

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

Fails the general notability guideline, which is the recommended guideline for teams under the sports sub-guideline. Many of the sources cited in the article are unreliable, and the ones that are don't have significant coverage. Quickly searching for more sources did not turn up anything else. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article has a long history of sockpuppetry, as shown in the linked SPI and its archive. It should have been speedy deleted G5, but the latest creator account is stuck in the SPI backlog, so it's not technically eligible. Real Malabar F.C. is EC-protected, but it's been recreated under several spelling variants in draft and main space: this one was originally created as Real Malabar F.C, and moved to main space by a now blocked sock. Wikishovel (talk) 08:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't want to bring up the sockpuppetry allegations until the SPI had gone through, but the page creator WikiSarfu has now been blocked. If this is closed as delete, I would highly recommend the closing administrator match the extended-confirmed creation protection on this title and related titles to discourage further disruption on the subject. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:13, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: articles relevant
103.48.160.35 (talk) 17:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC) — 103.48.160.35 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [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.

If an editor wants to work on this article, it can be restored to Draft space. Liz Read! Talk! 00:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

200 Plus

[edit]
200 Plus (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 the sources contain passing mentions rather than WP:SIGCOV. I couldn't find anything online that could be utilised. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:35, 23 September 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. It doesn't appear that sources provide the SIGCOV that we require to Keep an article in an AFD discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 00:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Bray

[edit]
Jim Bray (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:NACTOR because he’s only appeared in one film. The Film Creator (talk) 22:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I'm doubtful that the sources presented above qualify as reliable independent secondary coverage. They mostly read like advertorials or native advertising of some sort. For example, the very end of the source with by far the most coverage says

    Do you fit the bill? Maybe you can be the girl who changes Jim's isolationist life style? If you think so, maybe it would help to write Jim and tell him how you feel! We know he would love to hear from you! You can write to him at this address:
    Jim Bray
    c/o Compass International Pictures
    9229 Sunset Blvd.
    Los Angeles, CA. 90069

    We can't just indiscriminately throw links at an AfD and call it a day. Left guide (talk) 08:48, 26 September 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 Yavin 4. Liz Read! Talk! 00:21, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yavin

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

This article is a non notable fork of Yavin 4 where the Battle of Yavin actually takes place, making it the third article covering basically the same material. Most source talk about Yavin 4 with only trivial mentions for Yavin itself. (Probably because Yavin appears on screen for a few seconds.) Jontesta (talk) 00:08, 23 September 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 Fictional universe of Avatar. Liz Read! Talk! 00:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pandoran biosphere

[edit]
Pandoran biosphere (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)

Fork of Fictional universe of Avatar. We do not need two articles about the same thing. Both are doubtfully notable based on trivial mentions but I believe that Fictional universe of Avatar has more upside as more sources talk generally about the setting of Avatar. Jontesta (talk) 00:04, 23 September 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.