Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

WP:AFD/Y

Purge page cache if page isn't updating.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< September 25	September 27 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

John-Paul Tran

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

WP:TOOSOON for an article at the moment. This article should wait until there is some actual WP:SIGCOV of the subject, who is still a child athlete. JTtheOG (talk) 19:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, and California. JTtheOG (talk) 19:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Could not find any coverage besides a singular mention [1] (not including the 1 source on the article). Fails WP:NATHLETE. Sir MemeGod  21:53, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would also support draftification per the nomination until Tran gets more coverage. Sir MemeGod  21:54, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No coverage found, and a long way from being a notable athlete for our purposes here. I don't even thing drafting would help, still a young competitor, not competing on the national level Oaktree b (talk) 23:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No significant independent coverage found. WP:MANOTE talks about notable artists need to be at least adult black belts, winning junior events has never been considered WP notable in MA. No reason to draftify this article. When he meets either WP:GNG or an SNG, the article will need to be rewritten then. According to coverage, this event had less than 200 competitors ages 5 to 17 competing in over 40 divisions. Papaursa (talk) 22:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nom and Papaursa. WP:TOOSOON Lekkha Moun (talk) 10:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete: I think its important to note that John-Paul Tran was recently featured on the front page of Nguoi-Viet news. The article (which is only available in Vietnamese) can be found here. In light of this it's clear that John-Paul has a substantial enough presence to have a Wikipedia article. Dima Nekhoroshyi (talk) 20:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked into anything else here, but I can confirm that this is significant coverage. -- asilvering (talk) 22:40, 26 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!} 23:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Limentra di Sambuca

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

Unsourced stub about a minor Italian river. Sources seem to exist either as trivial mentions or database entries with name and coordinates, as described as failing wp:NATFEAT. I can maybe see a merge into Reno (river), but that article is also essentially unreferenced. Lenny Marks (talk) 20:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have also nominated the following article: Limentra orientale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) as a bundled nomination, as it is was creted by the same Wikipedian and is essentially in the same exact circumstances as this article, but is about a different tributary of the same river. Neither one appears to be notable enough for its own page. --Lenny Marks (talk) 21:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Lenny Marks (talk) 20:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. These rivers are clearly notable. I added four references to both articles, it shouldn't be difficult to find more. Markussep ^Talk 07:23, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources added appear substantial (not just database entries) and indicate a degree of notability. Recon rabbit 18:54, 26 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!} 23:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eight Sleep

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

Clearly a soft "infomercial" on WP that is not notable. Normchou ^💬 20:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources 7 and 12 are product reviews, that don't appear to be paid promotional items. Why PC Mag is reviewing a bedding system is beyond me, but they're both RS per Source Highlighter, so are fine. I think we can establish notability with these and the other sources given. Oaktree b (talk) 20:28, 5 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!} 23:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Needs a bit of cleanup but I think the product is notable enough. Pablo (talk) 12:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability of the *company*. If someone believes the product is notable and wants to write an article about the product is is likely going to be under a different named article. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Which sources help establish WP:NCORP?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I should probably start that topic at RSN I keep on not getting around to, but at present, I am still disinclined to accept affiliate marketing as satisfying ORGIND, and would therefore also recommend against an article on any of the products of this company, not having found any references meeting the criteria for those. Similarly, I could not find any qualifying coverage for the company itself, so I will have to go with delete. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:56, 26 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!} 23:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Thieves' Labyrinth

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

A novel that I cannot find enough sources for it to pass the WP:GNG or WP:NBOOK. I think the Historical Novel Society source can be considered reliable, but the "eurocrime" site does not appear to be one, meaning there is only a single potentially reliable source here. I have tried various searches, but have been unable to find any kind of actual reviews or coverage that goes beyond a name-drop in reliable sources of any kind. The closest I found was this article on Kirkus, but the top states that it is a Sponsored Blog post, and so cannot count as a review for the purposes of establishing notability. Neither the author nor book series has an article, so I was unable to identify any potential Redirect or Merge target, and with only one source, it does not pass the WP:GNG or WP:NBOOK. As it does have the one source, I figured I would bring it to AFD rather than simply WP:PRODing it, to see if anyone else could find any other potentially reliable sources or reviews for it. Rorshacma (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and United Kingdom. Rorshacma (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's very odd that we have an article on the third book and none of the others. Other books in the series have reviews, ones on Proquest from the Lincolnshire Echo, the Times Literary Supplement, this that I am unsure of the reliability of, this interview by a major publisher. A series article could probably be stitched together from these, instead of covering the individual books, but I don't have strong feelings here. Also according to this source "James McCreet" is actually a pseudonym of Matt Stanley. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and someone can rescope it as the series. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into an article about the three book series using the sources identified above. The Kirkus review may be usable as the blog is by an experienced writer "J. Kingston Pierce is both the editor of The Rap Sheet and the senior editor of January Magazine." There was an article about the author James McCreet and articles about the other two books in the series but they were all deleted as promotional under speedy deletion criteria G11. I missed the speedy deletion of the other articles but objected to the deletion of this one and edited out the promotional content. The author article was restored to userspace here, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I see a Merge suggested but no existing target article identified. If the article doesn't exist, it can't be a target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 19 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!} 23:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gale Force Nine

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

Fails WP:ORGCRIT or WP:GNG. There is nothing from the article or BEFORE that suggests notability on any ground. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games and Companies. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a well-known company within the game industry that has worked with some of the big names in that field over the past 25 years (Wizards of the Coast / Star Trek franchise). I have added a short history sourced by several interviews, but there's a lot more that can be written if someone want to do a bit more digging. A list of their extensive games and accessories could be added as well, if someone had a hankering. Guinness323 (talk) 06:33, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Guinness323. BOZ (talk) 06:39, 21 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!} 23:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. mikeblas (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 17:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I don't think the article fails the guidelines, I suggest cutting the article down, but I don't think it should be deleted. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 11:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for SM Mall of Asia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:53, 26 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!} 23:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Rogers Arena

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at Rogers Arena (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. Weak statement of inclusion criteria. mikeblas (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 16:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for Rogers Arena. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:53, 26 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!} 23:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at the O2 Arena

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the O2 Arena (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. Weakly stated inclusion criteria does not match title. mikeblas (talk) 15:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 16:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 12. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Of all the nominations in this set, I was most prepared to find some WP:SIGCOV of "History's greatest events at O2 Arena" or some such -- and yet I didn't. I don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for O2 Arena. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:53, 26 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!} 23:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at The OVO Hydro

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at The OVO Hydro (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. mikeblas (talk) 16:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 16:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for The OVO Hydro. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:51, 26 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!} 23:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Perth Arena

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at Perth Arena (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. No explanation of inclusion criteria. mikeblas (talk) 16:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 16:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for Perth Arena. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:51, 26 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!} 23:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at the Sydney SuperDome

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the Sydney SuperDome (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. Weak statement of inclusion criteria. mikeblas (talk) 16:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 16:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for Sydney SuperDome. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:50, 26 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, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Kia Forum

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at Kia Forum (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. mikeblas (talk) 15:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and California. Shellwood (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for Kia Forum. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:49, 26 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, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at the Araneta Center

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the Araneta Center (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. mikeblas (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 16:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for Araneta Center. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:48, 26 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, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Canada Life Centre

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at Canada Life Centre (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. mikeblas (talk) 15:46, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 16:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Don't see any sources discussing this set of events as a group, so ultimately this article violates WP:NOR and fails WP:NLIST. (I also don't see any meaningful navigational value per WP:LISTPURP.) Obviously, notable acts can be discussed at the main page for Canada Life Centre. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:48, 26 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!} 23:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Société Angélique

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

A couple passing references do not make this a real thing...

Note: This discussion has been included in the France and Organizations lists of deletion discussions. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 13:42, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently there was an ill-attended previous AfD under a different page name: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Angelic_Society

Delete: as I wrote on the TP, there's no serious scholarship that I can find on this subject... there seems to be a curious conflation of a geographical name in Lyon (Angélique, cf. this article) with a coterie/cenacle of humanists that really did exist but was not named... An article of interest: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20673401 (which pretty much categorically debunks the existence of this "secret society"). -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 22:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I just noticed a previous AfD in 2014, which relies on an Editions Arqa book (definitely not an RS, the book is not even held by the BM de Lyon!) and a few passing mentions... -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 14:08, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the article on Sebastian Gryphius, because of, if nothing else, Henri Baudrier's reference, and the subsequent debunking of the existence of such a secret society. The discussion of the Société Angélique is more than just in passing, see for example La Société Angélique by Célestin Valois (2007), regardless of the credence one gives to her conclusions. The society remains of current interest, as Jean-henri Probst-biraben inputs Rabelais' membership in the Société Angélique in his Rabelais et les secrets du Pantagruel (2020). Jean-henri Probst-biraben further discusses the Grasset d'Orcet reference currently cited in our Wikipedia article. In Étude de la production éditoriale de Sébastien Gryphe sur deux années caractéristiques : 1538 et 1550 (2000) the authors expressly discuss the involvement of Sebastian Gryphius with free-thinkers and other reformers, and its importance whether or not the secret society, Société Angélique, as described by Baudrier, existed. SashiRolls mentioned that the Editions Arqa book wasn't in the BM de Lyon, but the cited material was an extract published in the online journal Les Chroniques de Mars. Patrick Berlier's book, La Société Angélique in two volumes (272 pages ISBN 2-7551-0002-8 (2004) and 317 pages ISBN 2-7551-0011-7 (2005)) is held at the Bibliothèque Nationale de France (BnF). --Bejnar (talk) 19:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you provide evidence that the Baladins de la Tradition website you link to or the Editions Arqa or Éditions de la Tarente volumes are peer-reviewed? Thanks. As for the reference to Bats, the authors say Au XIXe siècle, Henri Baudrier qualifie l'Atelier du Griffon de « société angélique pour les libres-penseurs ». Ce propos reste sans doute à nuancer, mais il est vrai que Gryphe, qui ne paraît pas avoir adhéré au protestantisme répandu dans les milieux de l’imprimerie lyonnaise, n’a pas hésité à fréquenter des réformés. Several things are worth noting. First Baudrier himself rejects the name, but cites another 19th C. scholar and accuses him of sloppy scholarship (M. Pierre Gauthiez, Etudes sur le xvi° siècle, traite assez légèrement ce même sujet en ces termes:). Second, Bats et al. note that this claim needs nuance. Third, in the published version of the text in conference proceedings this sentence has been removed, presumably due to the error mentioned above (Baudrier is citing another author whose claim he rejects). (Cf. sommaire, text #3, I have the book in front of me and can attest that the claim has been removed in the context of the peer-reviewed volume published in 2008). What is WP:DUE is already included in the Sebastien Gryphe article, there is no need to add anything further from these "esoterica" peddlers... Also, the BNF serves as "dépôt légal" like the LOC, the book existing in their catalog is not a guarantee of its quality. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 19:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Comments above attest to lively scholarly discussion of the fictional Société Angélique (or the hoax of the Société Angélique, whichever you prefer). The realness of the subject is not a factor in its notability; cf. Garduña or Deep state in the United States. Fictional constructs by occultists and bad historians are discussed where notable, e.g. Witch-cult hypothesis. I'm no expert on the historiography but if RS emphasise the shoddiness of work which purports the existence of this society as much as it sounds like they do, a move to something like "Société Angélique hoax" could be a way to satisfy concerns? Nonetheless, the subject itself clearly meets GNG. —Kilopylae (talk) 16:24, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: to help the closer assess the "liveliness" of the "scholarly discussion", a search for the ISBNs cited above for Berlier in SUDOC shows they are not found in any university library anywhere in France / Navarre. Searching for "Société Angélique" in the title field shows that there are zero books in any university libraries with these words in the title. Reminder WP:GNG requires multiple reliable sources, rather than fringe esoterica. (Here are the nine results in all of JStor, only one of which is related to the subject because it contains (only) the erroneous quote from Bats etal. previously published on en.wp --i.e. likely citogenesis). Here are the five results in Persée, all unrelated to the subject here. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 17:07, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further data point: The 13-page index of names in Quid Novi: Sébastien Gryphe, à l'occasion du 450e anniversaire de sa mort (Enssib) allows us to determine if any of the people cited above are mentioned in the conference papers of the experts on the subject. Patrick Berlier, Claude Sosthène Grasset d'Orcet, Jean-Henri Probst-Biraben, Michael Lamy, Pierre Gauthiez, and Nicolas de Lange are all absent from this index, suggesting their relevance to Gryphe scholarship is insignificant. Baudrier, critical of the formal existence of this alleged society, is extensively cited, and the Bats et al. article is published, as mentioned above, without the reference to a putative société angélique found in the pre-press version cited in the en.wp entry. (nb: there is no fr.wp entry) -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 10:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As such, the suggestion above that we move the entry to Société Angélique hoax seems to me unnecessary. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 10:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is convincing—I now agree that the outcome should be delete. My previous answer misjudged the situation and assumed it was a widely-discussed idea in a bygone period that modern historians often take a moment to dismiss in passing; SashiRolls does a good job of showing that it is in fact a totally fringe notion mostly ignored (rather than dismissed) by mainstream academics. For me this is the relevant distinction. —Kilopylae (talk) 14:10, 25 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!} 23:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luis Carlos Vélez

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

Uncited for years and promotional. (I took out some of the more obvious promotion but some remains, such as the professional head shot). ... discospinster _talk 22:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, News media, Economics, and Colombia. ... discospinster _talk 22:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IC 167

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

Could not find any individual coverage on this object. Should redirect to List of IC objects.

Added after Praemonitus's vote: While there is coverage of the group it is a part of, I couldn't find any coverage of the object specifically. Sir MemeGod  18:54, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Astronomy. Sir MemeGod  18:54, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's borderline. I find brief discussions of IC 167 in a few studies, particularly of the NGC 697 group. Praemonitus (talk) 13:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ZephyrMusic

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

Non-notable music artist that does not seem to meet any of the criteria listed at WP:MUSICBIO.

Most of the articles listed are from non-reliable sources ("wikifamouspeople", "musicalive.net", "chunedesk") or are short articles that are essentially press releases about new music. The Voix Du Nord seems to be having technical difficulties; I can't even access them nine out of ten times without an error.
No album on the national music chart, no record certified gold
No non-trivial coverage of a concert tour
No album release from a major record label
etc, the list goes on.

Furthermore, his own website is hosted on and has a subdomain with Wix - while not strictly in the WP:MUSICBIO guidelines, a notable musician would not be using a free site such as that.

The subject has been deleted as non-notable three times in his own Home country: fr:ZephyrMusic ~Darth Stabro^{Talk/Contribs} 22:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (4th nomination)[reply]

Writing Rock Township, Divide County, North Dakota

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

Fails WP:NTOWN. All references I found were either trivial, census/directory information, or referring to the historical site. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 22:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Dakota-related deletion discussions. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 22:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I don't necessarily disagree that WP:NTOWN is failed here, but I do want to mention that there are a plethora of city-related articles that fail this test. Should we delete them all, too? I believe that simply having the historical site there makes it much more notable and worthy of an article than thousands of other places covered on Wikipedia. I should note that I also made this article within the scope of WP Cities, and adhered to their guidelines for US places, where applicable. SouthernDude297 (talk) 22:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. How is NTOWN violated? It is a populated, officially recognized place. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
None of its sources (or any that I could find) confer notability. As for its current sources, census data and GNIS info does not provide notability. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 23:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sonmati

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

I couldn't find sources to verify this information Boleyn (talk) 18:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Bihar. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Layover

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

Just a long dictionary definition, the sources are almost entirely nothing but definitions themselves. Possibly a case of WP:TNT, the concept of a layover might be notable unto itself, but this article doesn't even try to make that case, simply defining what it is over and over in different contexts. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Refugee lens investing

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

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of notability under GNG or SNG. A vague term invented by a company for something that it does. The references have a bit on the company (most of them just passing along self-published material) and the leader, but there is no coverage much less the required in-depth coverage on what this actual is. As result the article is just vague arm waving and related platitude about refugees without even cover covering the putative topic North8000 (talk) 18:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Whats your plan to get it delete. There is quite heavy block of academic references on it. I reviwed it and thought the chances of deletion were slim. scope_creep^Talk 20:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 21:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flirtini (app)

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

This appears to be an advertisement for the app and not an encyclopedic entry. Ktkvtsh (talk) 17:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Ktkvtsh (talk) 17:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: That article is a massive copyright violation. I removed 11 copyvios and it might look bad for that reason. I was honestly unsure if G11 or G12 was valable here, and there are other probable copyvios, see Talk:Flirtini (app). Would like if an admin or a more experienced editor could step in. win8x (talking | spying) 01:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment additional work with the links and the report now does not contain any copyright violations.

Also, quotes from articles were rewritten to avoid promotional writing style. Stia Pochotnaya (talk) 13:01, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure looks better now. Thank you. win8x (talking | spying) 22:44, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please advise what should be removed to avoid this impression? Stia Pochotnaya (talk) 13:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 21:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brice Rhodes

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

Biography of a criminal that is notable only for their crime (WP:BLP1E) which was created as a draft by a sock then moved to mainspace by their master account. If the crime was particularly notable it could be moved to a more suitable title focusing on the event, but there is (unfortunately) nothing particularly notable about the murders that extends beyond WP:NOTNEWS. Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: Extensive local coverage [2] provides a bit of background. i suppose a triple life sentence would meet criminal notability. Happy to !draft instead, this person isn't going anywhere for a long while, so there is time for more coverage to happen. Oaktree b (talk) 22:26, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not worthy of a biographical article per WP:BLP1E, with barely any content in the article that indicates a lasting impact and failure to meet WP:NEVENTS in the case of the murders themselves. JeffSpaceman (talk) 00:09, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18 (British Board of Film Classification)

AfDs for this article:

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

Article appears to lack standalone notability, and much of it is unsourced and may be WP:OR. What references there are do not establish WP:SIGCOV:
1 is just a list of the BBFC's ratings.
2 is primary.
3 comes the closest to SIGCOV, but is mostly about 9 Songs as a case study for general film censorship in the UK, and only briefly mentions the 18 rating.
4 just links to the Channel 4 website. Probably a dead link.
5 is WP:USERG and essentially just a list.
6 covers a completely different rating system and never mentions the BBFC, or Cannibal Holocaust, as it is claimed to. I have no idea why this is cited, and it might just be a mistake.
7-9 are primary.
The external link is just describing the rating, and BFI has pages that go into similar detail about the other ratings.
Google Scholar lists many articles that briefly refer to the 18 rating, but none that focus substantially on it. [3] This article comes the closest, but is mostly a comparison of British and French rating systems in their entirety, and covers the 15 rating in just as much detail. Google Books and JSTOR similarly list several books/articles that mention the 18 rating, but none that give it substantial focus. All of them focus either on film censorship in the UK, or the BBFC as a whole. Those that do discuss the 18 rating, such as [4], discuss other ratings in similar detail. The 18 rating might be mentioned more often than the others in secondary sources, but this is because it is the rating censored films usually have. The 18 rating itself is never the main topic, and does not have SIGCOV. Discussion of the 18 rating individually, while definitely more than WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs, appears insufficient to establish standalone notability compared to the U-15 ratings.
The BBFC is the only rating system I'm aware of that has individual pages for specific ratings. The standard practice is to include information about ratings on the system's page, as with Pan-European Game Information or Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle der Filmwirtschaft. Ratings from other systems with their own pages tend to be notable due to their rarity, and their articles are usually lists, such as List of NC-17 rated films or List of AO-rated video games. The BBFC 18 rating is not particularly rare, so it does not meet what appear to be the criteria for a standalone page (a list would be far too long). Most of the content of this article is already covered in British Board of Film Classification, History of British film certificates, and Film censorship in the United Kingdom. There is already ample information here on the 18 rating, and this article should redirect to British Board of Film Classification#Current certificates. Masskito (talk)

Yolette Lévy

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

Biography of a smalltown municipal councillor and activist, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing notability criteria for local politicians or activists. As always, neither city councillors nor activists are automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they existed, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy coverage and analysis about their work to validate its significance -- but 16 of the 20 footnotes here are directly affiliated primary sources that aren't support for notability at all, and of the just four hits that come from real GNG-worthy media, two are just death reportage from the local media in her hometown; one is just a short blurb about her winning a minor award that isn't highly notable enough to clinch an instant "she's notable because she won this award" freebie all by itself for a person who's otherwise this poorly sourced; and the last one doesn't mention her name at all, and is here solely to verify via her absence from it that she didn't win a city council seat in the election that it's "sourcing", and thus isn't a demonstration of her notability. (And meanwhile, all of the city council elections she did win are supported by the primary sourcing rather than GNG-worthy analysis about her work on the council.)
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to be referenced much, much better than this. Bearcat (talk) 21:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 21:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lakana

AfDs for this article:

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

Lakana presents this term as representing a specific type of watercraft (an outrigger canoe) with a specific type of rig (the "downwind" mastless rig that is supported between two sprits). This specific type of craft does exist – it is shown in the photo illustrating the article. However, in Malagasy, as far as I can determine, the word "Lakana" is any type of canoe, with or without outriggers, with or without a sailing rig, and certainly not confined to just one type of sailing rig. This is clear from the reference in the article
Hornell, James (1920). "67. The Common Origin of the Outrigger Canoes of Madagascar and East Africa". Man. 20: 134–139. doi:10.2307/2839454. Retrieved 5 September 2024.
which has a translation provided by a colonial administrator confirming that "lakana" is not a specific type of canoe, but a canoe (or boat) in general. Hornell is still seen as a useful authority on the ethnography of sailing craft in the areas in which he worked. If the word applied to a particular hull and rig combination, he would have picked up on this.

I have asked for help on the Wikiproject Madagascar[5] with no result. Therefore, I think we have to conclude that these concerns about the article are correct. If "lakana" is a much broader term than the article suggests, if we do not the name of the type of craft that the article describes (I can find no source that makes this clear), then the only option is to delete the article as unsupported by sources.

In passing, it is worth saying that I have come to the conclusion that though the subject of traditional sailing craft in Madagascar would make a very interesting (to me) article on Wikipedia, there simply are not sufficient sources to do the subject justice. This is after some considerable searching. (It would be great to be proved wrong in this.) ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 13:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this is the second AfD nomination for Lakana, but the first related to a company not a type of boat. TSventon (talk) 14:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, History, Transportation, and Africa. Skynxnex (talk) 14:54, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. In terms of:

Scope. To my read, the article doesn't state (at least not directly as interpreted by the nominator) that the article "presents this term as representing a specific type of watercraft (an outrigger canoe [of Madagascar]) with a specific type of rig". Rather it states (as would appear to be supported by Hornell (1920; p.138) and Richardson (1887; p.345)) that the Lakana is (yes) a specific type of watercraft. Being an outrigger canoe. That is "dug out". Rather than "built". IE: A "specific type of watercraft (a dugout outrigger canoe [of Madagascar])". Which is supported by Richardson in particular. Yes, the article mentions different types of rigging. But I don't read it as stating that the rigging type is part of the definition/classification. If that is unclear, I would suggest that we clarify or change the text. Rather than delete the article.
Sources. To my mind, there are sufficient sources (including the two above) to support some text about the subject. Being a type of dugout outrigger traditionally used in Madagascar. Even if just as a sub-set / sub-section of the Pirogue article. Which appears to cover the "generic" class of small dugout canoe. Globally. With a redirect left behind. To a subsection on the Madagascan type.
Suggested action. If the issues with the title are scope (including clarity of the text) or sources (reflecting them), I'm not sure that outright deletion is the right way to go. Deletion isn't cleanup. At the very least, a merge/redirect seems like the way to go. To Pirogue. Leaving out any "questionable" or potentially confusing text.

My 2x cents at any rate. Guliolopez (talk) 19:24, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment.

Translation: The key issue is whether Lakana is a term for "outrigger canoes which are based on a dugout hull" or if it applies to "any dugout canoe". The two sources discussed above seem to give the definition of an unqualified "dugout canoe". At present the article is solely about the outrigger version. To assist in decision-making on the meaning, see this video[6] with the caption "Miandry ny lakana miampita" which google translates as "The boat is waiting to cross". We can see there is no outrigger. (Whilst OR is not allowed for article content, there is no prohibition on using it to help understand a subject.) The boat in the video is very different from the seagoing outrigger canoes.
What makes this more difficult is the knowledge that the Vezo make use of outrigger canoes with a distinctive common spritsail rig (as defined by Edwin Doran [7], pg 40, fig 21, drawing B) that is not described, in Madagascar, by Hornell or anyone else. (Hornell describes this rig in the neighbouring Comoro Islands [8]) A Vezo boat is the one illustrating the Pirogue article – but there is no RS that identifies the rig type. And, of course, Commons has no obligation for its descriptions of pictures to be supported by an RS. This might contribute to the impetus for deletion in this editor's mind (as proposer), as there is a very common class of Madagascan dugout outrigger canoe that is totally undescribed in RSs, so making the subject incomplete. (See youtube[9] for these Vezo craft under sail, which is something that most believe Hornell never saw). All I have to back this thought up is some private correspondence with a researcher on Austronesian rigs – so essentially WP:OR.
If I understand User:Guliolopez correctly, their suggestion would mean a complete rewrite of the article to fit the sources and then merge it into Pirogue. That would fit with the intent behind the proposal: that we do not really have enough sourced material for an article on the Lakana on its own. Have I got this correct? ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 21:07, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply. Hi ThoughtIdRetired. RE: "suggestion would mean a complete rewrite of the article to fit the sources and then merge it into Pirogue". Effectively, yes, I think that's probably the most appropriate outcome. Retain the title. As a redirect. And summarise and merge the content/text (about the Lakana being a form of Pirogue/dugout traditionally associated with Madagascar) into the Pirogue article. Guliolopez (talk) 14:00, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. (Note: prior to the AfD nomination, I had suggested to the nominator that they put this up for deletion.) My take on the current sources etc. is that none of them indicate that the lakana is anything other than the Malagasy for a canoe. My interpretation of each source etc. below:
- "The lateen rig allows a lakana to sail closer to the wind, so giving some windward performance.[1]”
  - My interpretation: Doesn't indicate that the lakana is something different.
- "The boat is often referred to by the general French term "pirogue", which can include boats with no outriggers.[2]"
  - My interpretation: “general French term” suggests there's nothing special about the lakana.
- “The technology was adapted in neighboring East Africa, like the Tanzanian ngalawa and the Fulani laana.[3][4]”
  - My interpretation: Can't access these sources, but the Wikipedia wording suggests that there are similar craft elsewhere - i.e. there's nothing peculiar to Madagascar about these.
- “some locals prefer the Hazomalany wood (Hazomalania voyronii of the family of Hernandiaceae).[5]”
  - My interpretation: Doesn't indicate that the lakana is something different.
- Hornell, James (September 1920). “The Common Origin of the Outrigger Canoes of Madagascar and East Africa”
  - My interpretation: Only indicates that “lakana” is simply the Malagasy for “canoe”.
- Richardson, J (December 1887). “The Affinities Of Malagasy With The Melanesian Languages”
  - My interpretation: Only indicates that “lakana” is simply the Malagasy for “canoe”.
- “An Austronesian square-sail is more common (e.g. in Ambaro Bay).[a]”
  - My interpretation: Doesn't indicate that the lakana is something different.

--A bit iffy (talk) 17:48, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Does not qualify for soft-deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~, as there is very little material in this article that can be merged into Pirogue. On going through this in detail, there are perhaps three sentences to add to Pirogue from this article. (The tree species used for the sailing versions, the "lakana" is the Malagasy for pirogue, and that this word applies to dug out canoes, with or without outriggers and with various rigs. We cannot say more as the sailing rigs are incompletely described by sources.) Lakana would just remain as a redirect. ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 21:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stiking your duplicate vote. Your nomination statement is your Delete vote. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Beckley

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

Fails WP:SPORTCRIT. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2015 World Series of Poker: Subject only has notable coverage due to WP:1E, and without any additional RS covering him this should be redirected as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 21:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Other second-place finishers in the Main Event has qualified as notable (see f.e Steven Jones) and Beckley is atleast as notable as them. PsychoticIncall (talk) 08:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:06, 12 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!} 18:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus yet. Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at the Little Caesars Arena

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the Little Caesars Arena (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. Stated inclusion criteria does not match title. mikeblas (talk) 15:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Michigan. Skynxnex (talk) 16:19, 12 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!} 18:38, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Daughtry

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED from his daughter or his protege. Reliable sources appear to only have passing mentions of him. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and New York. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Muboshgu: A search in the NY Times archive: [10] shows he has gotten press for decades as an important community activist in New York City. Thriley (talk) 19:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NY Times archive to me appears to be passing mentions. I lack a subscription though so I can't see some of them. I don't know what to make of this for notability. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy link for those with WP:Library ProQuest access. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 20:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a different Herbert Daughtry. The Herbert Daughtry of this afd was 47 in 1978: [11] Thriley (talk) 21:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Thriley (talk) 21:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Ujifusa

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

Tried draftfying this, and it was more or less immediately put back in mainspace. Tried find independent, and I couldn't find any. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Authors. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article is not written in correct format, and the author is clearly the subject (check username).

TheMotto (talk) 19:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, New York, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Eaves

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

Lack of independant notabilityWP:notinherited. Redirect to wife? TheLongTone (talk) 14:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and North Carolina. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm going to take this opportunity to bring up WP:NPPHOUR, as this was nominated for deletion 22 minutes after being converted from a redirect to an article. Also noting that the redirect's creator was notified, not the person who converted it to an article (pinging Willthacheerleader18). Hey man im josh (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hey man im josh Thanks for the heads up! -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as subject is the first "First Gentleman" of North Carolina. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He also launched the Students@Work educational program for middle school students in North Carolina and Carolina Helping Heroes for military spouses. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Willthacheerleader18 (talk · contribs) makes a great point about being the first First Gentleman. Snowman304|talk 04:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While we have a large number of first spouse articles, I don't think most, and not Bob Eaves, meet GNG. A couple of assigned statewide initiatives would make GNG meaningless.--Mpen320 (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMOCA 60 Initiative Coeur 4

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

There is no WP:SIGCOV of this sailboat and thus it fails WP:GNG. PROD was contested. Would support redirection to IMOCA 60. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Transportation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, its common practice that every IMOCA 60 has its own page, like the french wikipedia (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initiatives-C%C5%93ur_4). The importance is given by the Vendée Globe starting only in about two months. Give me some time to bring the article up to speed. V.Glas (talk) 19:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@V.Glas ~~You created the page~~ This page was created in November 2023 and it has had no independent, reliable, secondary sources since then. That seems like plenty of time to find them and "bring the article up to speed." (I don't believe they exist, since I searched for them WP:BEFORE nominating.) As for your argument that "it's common practice," that's an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument that does not rely on any actual guidelines, and we follow English Wikipedia guidelines here. What is your policy-based reason for keeping this article? One alternative, if you believe sources will be available after the Vendee Globe, is to draftify this article, which is the appropriate place for it if you're still working on finding sources. Let me know what you think. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I did not create the page. That was @Yachty4000. If you are looking for sources or notability, take the French article as reference. I already translated and added some parts. V.Glas (talk) 20:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for my misstatement and have struck it above. Regardless there is now a week for sufficient sources to be identified. As I said, I didn’t find any that fit the bill (and I looked in French as well). But if you find some and they do meet the standards of WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS I will withdraw the nomination. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMOCA 60 Maitre Coq 5

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

There is no WP:SIGCOV of this sailboat and thus it fails WP:GNG. PROD was contested. Would support redirection to IMOCA 60. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:55, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Transportation.Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For arguments against the deletion, see similar discussion here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IMOCA 60 Initiative Coeur 4 V.Glas (talk) 20:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The editor who contested the PROD has added several sources to this article; however, all but one are affiliated sources or primary sources and thus we still don't have a WP:GNG pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to IMOCA 60: I don't see WP:GNG being met here. Also fails Section 2.5 of WP:NVEHICLE (Vehicles that are generally treated by secondary sources as distinct entities are generally notable), which doesn't seem to be the case here. Sir MemeGod  17:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FunTrivia

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Fun Trivia

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

I like this site, and have used it for a while, but it unfortunately fails WP:GNG, all sources are self-published. The archived Yahoo source is merely a list of similar trivia websites. Sekundenlang (talk) 12:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 12. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack of significant coverages and one source is not enough. Xegma(talk) 13:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Websites, and Canada. Skynxnex (talk) 13:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Maybe it's because of the SEO optimization of trivia websites in general and the name of the website "fun trivia", but I am unable to find any sources on it. Currently it only has what the company says about itself and a primary-source link to an old trivia list page on Yahoo. It seems unlikely that sources will be found, even if they exist. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Varrio 204th Street

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

Lack of notability. TheLongTone (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and California. Shellwood (talk) 16:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of criminal gangs in Los Angeles: While I did find a singular Washington Post article about them, I can't find anything else that prevents a failure of WP:GNG. A redirect would work. Sir MemeGod  20:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lori Lewis

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

Based largely on WP:SELFPUBLISHED sources such as blogs and social media. Fails WP:SIGCOV. A suitable WP:ATD would be a redirect to Therion (band). 4meter4 (talk) 14:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Iowa. Shellwood (talk) 14:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the band of which she was a member. Bearian (talk) 03:03, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queen consort of Awadh

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

Couldn't find any sources with Googling (it returns information about the British royalty when you exclude Wikipedia). I tried draftification, and it was immediately recreated. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and India. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 17:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Short comes up on Wikipedia, so maybe it could be more of a list-class article. I'd say redirect to Nawabs of Awadh, but I'm not sure what to retitle that to include queens consort. Maybe "Royalty of Awadh", and have Nawabs of Awadh redirect to that? Mrfoogles (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't really know what to put, but feel free to change it all to something more appropriate. They were unofficially known as the queen consorts, though. Noodles09 (talk) 18:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Nawabs of Awadh per Mrfoogles, considering the stub has no sources. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CJ Follini

AfDs for this article:

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

Serious COI with a history of sockpuppet editing (perpetrators now blocked). What is left is still a largely promotional article about a minor businessman who has dabbled in film production. Not notable enough for an article. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Businesspeople. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Good Neighbor Day

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

Orphan article with no meaningful content and three contradictory facts. Nick Levine (talk) 17:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of USA-related deletion discussions. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It’s an orphan article, and a stub at that, but the holiday is real, a quick google throws up literally hundreds of current references to it in various local newspapers talking about local events celebrating it this year, and the three contradictory facts aren’t contradictory - all three have sources proving they happened, as simply clicking on the source links shows immediately. It was invented, THEN Carter make a proclamation, THEN the senate passed a resolution, three different steps, taken over time, to promote the holiday. Like, sure, someone should absolutely edit the article to make it better, and I would have thought that would be the first step rather than listing it for deletion, policy certainly suggests it should be, but this is a no-brainer for keeping with THAT many sources showing sustained news coverage over literally decades, including 6 articles filed today alone. Absurdum4242 (talk) 19:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mikheil Lomtadze

AfDs for this article:

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

Procedural nomination per close at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 September 19. Please also refer to last two AfD's. Daniel (talk) 17:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This subject meets WP:GNG and WP:NBIO with WP:SIGCOV in Bloomberg News (2020, 2022, both available via The Wikipedia Library if you want to review), Forbes (authored by staff and thus reliable), Radio Tavisupleba (in Georgian), and Fortuna.ge (in Georgian). Most recently, there's SIGCOV of Lomtadze in BBC and Vedomosti on his purchase of the Wycombe Wanderers. I've also trimmed some of the fluff and added some of these sources to the article. It still needs more cleanup, and I would support protection on the page to address the history of COI/UPE editing -- but the sources show he meets the notability guideline. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As AfD1 closer, just stating I haven't had time or interest to review changes and support whatever conclusion emerges here. As I said in the DRV, it was probably time for a new discussion since much can change in two years. Star Mississippi 18:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Kazakhstan, and Georgia (country). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The Forbes article presented above is more about the company than this person. The Bloomberg articles are mostly about this person, but more about the companies that lose money. I can only find a BBC article that he bought a football/soccer club, which is minimally about this person and more about the transaction and is mostly quotes [12] from the person. Oaktree b (talk) 22:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you look at the foreign language sources? And the Forbes source is definitely SIGCOV of Lomtadze. It's a long feature and he is discussed in at least half the paragraphs, and it includes numerous biographical details. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Dobbin

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Irish footballer, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 17:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Ireland. JTtheOG (talk) 17:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nomination and WP:NATHLETE. I don't see significant (or really any, to be honest) coverage. Sir MemeGod  17:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Frantz

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

Has been unsourced for nearly two decades. Not seeing ""significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject" to meet WP:BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 17:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. AusLondonder (talk) 17:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning Keep(?). He did have an Arena Football League career spanning a decade and there does seem to be some coverage, although none of it is particularly spectacular: HS (1994), college 1997, 1997 (p2), 1998, 1999, 1999, 2013 ("the Rush showed up with an emergency kicker, 36-year-old Dan Frantz - five years removed from his last AFL action and 24 hours removed from grilling burgers in his backyard" - hah). There's probably enough to write a BASIC-compliant article here. Thoughts @AusLondonder:? BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't look at those clippings as I am still having some issues with Newspapers.com. However, here is this from 2004 and this from 2006 also. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources provided by BeanieFan11 provide the WP:SIGCOV needed to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 21:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tracey Collins

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

This is a low-profile individual who is not notable. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED from her famous boyfriend. "de facto first lady of NYC" is not a factoid that confers notability. The NYT piece cited is a brief mention of her, and the WP:NYPOST source is unreliable for U.S. politics. WP:BEFORE produced only this in addition. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and New York. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom or merge to Eric_Adams#Personal_life, these souces do not justify a separate article since she does not have even an informal public role. Reywas92^Talk 17:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see a NY Post article with her as the main focus as well as a People article and a few others. Sure, this page is going to be brief but it's still notable enough to keep. Nweil (talk) 17:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I commented on those. They do not establish notability. Have you seen WP:NYPOST? There is consensus the New York Post is generally unreliable for factual reporting, especially with regard to politics, particularly New York City politics. A tabloid newspaper, editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including examples of outright fabrication. Editors consider the New York Post more reliable before it changed ownership in 1976, and particularly unreliable for coverage involving the New York City Police Department. A 2024 RfC concluded that the New York Post is marginally reliable for entertainment coverage; see below. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not positive the subject of Tracey Collins falls under "politics". You said yourself she is a low-profile individual. I get that this is all tangentially related to politics but the tone of that article does not seem slanted or biased in a political way. I think the RfC does not apply here. Nweil (talk) 18:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Neither the NY Post nor People would have published those if not for her relationship to Eric Adams, hence NOTINHERITED and the connection to NYC politics. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Women, and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Begich III

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable congressional candidate. All coverage is election-related or passing mentions. Doesn't meet NPOL and I don't see how he meets GNG either. This page was previously created and deleted back in 2023. I'd support a redirect to to 2024 United States House of Representatives election in Alaska. The result of the previous discussion was a redirect to the page for the 2022 election; at this point, it makes more sense to redirect to the 2024 page since Begich is now in a one-on-one race with the incumbent, unlike in 2022 when there was another Republican in the race. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Alaska, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed not notable unless he wins. Yedaman54 (talk) 20:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rules and Referee Committee

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

Unable to find evidence this organisation meets WP:ORGCRIT. AusLondonder (talk) 16:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Sports. AusLondonder (talk) 16:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Just another organizational body with no notability that I can find. A redirect to Federation of International Bandy is a possibility, but really, what is there worth saving, and how plausible a search term is this. Drmies (talk) 16:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HappyTech

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

very clearly promotional, extremely thin, and extremely vague as well. I also can't really find any good sources outside of the ones provided on the page. Gaismagorm (talk) 15:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and France. Gaismagorm (talk) 15:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Hardiman

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

BLP article which has been completely unsourced for nearly two decades. Unable to find evidence of meeting WP:BASIC - namely lacking "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." AusLondonder (talk) 15:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Argy DJ

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

I can't find anything that suggests this DJ meets WP:NBIO or WP:NMUSICIAN. A lot of the content and sources are simply verified through YouTube or AV content and don't go to notability. A lot of the content of the article specifies where the subject has performed, but the coverage only shows listings (not SIGCOV) or just videos, as previously mentioned. The one caveat that I have is that I am not able to find (and therefore assess) any sources that may be in Greek. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Greece. Shellwood (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - If this article is kept, its title should be changed to Argy (DJ), because his stage name is simply Argy. He can't have that basic namespace though, due to the town of the same name. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Disruptive nomination. Any editor in good standing is welcome to bring this to AfD if they feel it merits one. Star Mississippi 15:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in the Bangladesh Army

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:MIL. The given references are only of examples that some women were appointed on a post, some women completed their courses/trainings etc. The article lacks an overview of the whole topic. RangaVIche (talk) 13:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Military, and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 13:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep the nominating statement is incorrect, several of the sources discuss women in the Bangladeshi army in general. The nomination for deletion was the first edit from this brand-new account, and this is the second time that happens with this article, as seen in the first AfD discussion, from last year. --bonadea contributions talk 14:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Mehedi Abedin 14:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep This is a very good article, and does have appropriate sourcing. Yes, I also noticed it could use a lead section - but if lack of one was point for deletion, that would eliminate a lot of existing Wikipedia articles. Of course it could use some editing. Even Featured Articles could use some editing. This one is a keeper. — Maile (talk) 15:02, 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.

Stop Galamsey Now Protest

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

While the article includes a number of references, the topic itself—a 3-day, low-consequence protest—doesn't seem notable enough to warrant an independent article. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Galamsey: As it is relevant there --- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 14:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: to the Galamsey article as suggested. This is a rather brief account of a protest, that only seems notable within the larger context of the story. Oaktree b (talk) 15:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lincoln cent mintage figures

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

No evidence of any notability for this WP:NOTSTATS list, fails WP:LISTN. Fram (talk) 08:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Economics, Lists, and United States of America. Fram (talk) 08:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated:

Merge with United States cent mintage figures as a WP:ATD. If that page is also non-notable it should be added to the deletion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm: Do you wish to amend your !vote, now that the target has been added to the nomination? Otherwise, this AfD could be procedurally closed with no action due to the improper mid-process scope expansion. Owen× ☎ 12:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"improper mid-process" as in after just 5 hours in a 1-week process, and after the only two responders explicitly asked to include it? Fram (talk) 12:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see where Zxcvbnm agreed to this inclusion. Once he does, there's no problem. Until then, yes, this is an improper mid-process scope expansion, even if it was one minute after he !voted here. You've been an admin, you know how this works. Owen× ☎ 13:26, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"If that page is also non-notable it should be added to the deletion." You are an admin, you should know how to read. Or to keep such personal remarks which add nothing to the discussion out of it, as they are obviously not helpful. Fram (talk) 13:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for sparking the confusion/argument, but I agree with Fram's addition of the parent list. Both fail WP:NOTSTATS, as said in the nomination. Every single "mintage figure" list is clearly just a database and I see no evidence presented that they are independently notable, I was leaving it open for someone to potentially present that evidence. I'm not sure I'd agree it's "improper" since nobody else actually registered their opinion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Glad we cleared this up. Owen× ☎ 14:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As the creator, it should be noted that I split this article off from United States cent mintage figures per WP:SIZESPLIT. I have no preference for deleting or keeping the article, so long as the same is done to United States cent mintage figures. However, I am opposed to merging it back into the parent article. - ZLEA _T\^C 12:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've added United States cent mintage figures to the nomination! Fram (talk) 13:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sebastian Cluer

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

There doesn't appear to be significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. None of the links in the article help establish notability. toweli (talk) 09:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Canada. toweli (talk) 09:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a subjective opinion coming from a lack of awareness of Canada's television entertainment scene. Sebastian Cluer is one of the most well known and in-demand directors in his country, having directed, produced and developed many notable shows that have had massive success both in his home country and abroad. Lots of them are on airlines, including Still Standing, Bollywed, Property Brothers...and the list goes on. These along with receiving many nominations and wins, particularly with The Canadian Screen Awards, which are the country's equivalent to the Oscars and Golden Globes combined.

Sebastian was also instrumental in the success of the hugely popular and successful show Kenny vs. Spenny and has been appearing in commentaries alongside Kenny Hotz as of late.

IMDB Sebastian Cluer for further validation Cliuthar (talk) 15:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, but we need sources about him. Simply being named in a list of nominees isn't enough for notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Article does need improvement, but there are far too many Gemini Award and Canadian Screen Award nominations and victories listed here to deem him "non-notable" at all. That's top-level national awards, equivalent to Emmys and Oscars, which is a notability lock even if the sourcing still needs improvement, and the sourcing for that kind of stuff most certainly can be improved. Bearcat (talk) 17:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But there isn't any sourcing to be found. I agree he's notable, but having a permastub for lack of sourcing isn't what we look for. Oaktree b (talk) 23:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Is notable" and "delete" cannot coexist. Gemini Awards and Canadian Screen Awards are an inherent notability lock, meaning that every person with those awards on their mantle must be allowed to have a Wikipedia article. I'll grant that not everybody named in our Genie, Gemini and CSA articles already has an article yet, but everybody named in any of them must be allowed to have an article as soon as somebody gets around to it, and there can be no exceptions to that: it's a top-level national award that nails inherent notability to the wall right on its face per WP:ANYBIO's "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times", which means it's inherently notable enough that it locks notability down even if the sourcing is inadequate. The only legitimate grounds for deleting a Gemini/Genie/CSA winner would be if sourceability were completely nonexistent (e.g. a person whose article falsely claimed a nomination or win that they didn't really have). Bearcat (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nominations suggest notability, but there just isn't enough coverage about him. I had to dig to even bring this up [13]. An interview that doesn't quite help notability. Delete for lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 23:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kira Hagi

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

Her acting roles are small or in movies that aren't notable themselves and she hasn't established herself as a notable artist. While there is considerable media attention, much of it feels sensationalistic. I might be overlooking something since I don’t speak Romanian but her notability shouldn't simply stem from her father being a famous footballer (WP:INVALIDBIO) Ynsfial (talk) 12:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, and Romania. Ynsfial (talk) 12:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. She seems to have notability on her own as an actress, though is hard for me to evaluate the notability of the films she acted in.Anonimu (talk) 14:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it should be kept, she seems notable in her own country Natlaur (talk) 23:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Spain. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Gheorghe_Hagi#Personal_life -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:50, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I share the same thoughts, I've seen Kira Hagi's article and honestly I think the Article still have what to be improved, as the movies she acted in, e.g. 167.250.71.19 (talk) 21:13, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SecurityScorecard

AfDs for this article:

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

Article recreated recently after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SecurityScorecard, notability of the company has not meaningfully changed since.

The new version of the article does have more references, however there is still not significant coverage of the company. The Bloomberg article is the most persuasive, however a company closing one significant deal does not clear the WP:NCORP bar. The remaining mentions are all trivial. Brandon (talk) 03:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source	Significant coverage?	Secondary?
"Canada Will Use Letter Grades to Assess Companies' Cyber Resilience". Bloomberg.com. 2024-01-11.
"SecurityScorecard Files Suit Against Safe Security". 2024-06-06.
Sawers, Paul (2021-03-18). "Cybersecurity ratings platform SecurityScorecard raises $180M". VentureBeat.	WP:ORGTRIV: capital transaction
Sawers, Paul (2017-10-12). "Cybersecurity risk-monitoring platform SecurityScorecard raises $27.5 million from Nokia, GV, Intel, Sequoia, others". VentureBeat.	WP:ORGTRIV: capital transaction
"Top three use cases for streaming data pipelines - what, how, why". diginomica.com. 2023-07-31.	Trivial mention of SecureScorecard as an example of a streaming data pipeline
Sawers, Paul (2021-05-12). "SecurityScorecard taps HackerOne to bring bug bounty data to security ratings". VentureBeat.
Maundrill, Beth (2023-12-01). "How TUI Group Strengthened its Third-Party Risk Management". Infosecurity Magazine.		Customer testimonial
Pasternack, Alex (March 3, 2023). "10 Most Innovative Companies in Security of 2023". Fast Company.	WP:ORGTRIV: "inclusion in lists of similar organizations"
Gallagher, Sean (2015-09-11). "MIT ranks high in bad security at major universities". Ars Technica.	Article is about the security posture of MIT, no significant coverage of the company itself
Newman, Lily Hay. "All the Ways US Government Cybersecurity Falls Flat". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028.	Article is about the security posture of the US government, no significant coverage of the company itself

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and New York. Brandon (talk) 03:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. OhHaiMark (talk) 03:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete G4. Mccapra (talk) 05:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Bloomberg, Fastcompany, Atstechnica, and CyberExpress together are good enough for me. Better Nuncio (talk) 08:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The sources almost exclusively only provide trivial coverage of the company, I've added a source assessment table to demonstrate this. For example, the Fast Company article is a textbook example of WP:ORGTRIV: "inclusion in lists of similar organizations, particularly in "best of", "top 100", "fastest growing" or similar lists." Brandon (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as article's AfC reviewer. I am withdrawing my decision, and keeping this open to others' input. While I originally thought this might have been a pretty good article, I understand the other viewpoints. I give partial support to remove this article per WP:ORGTRIV, which I think is a viable reason. OnlyNano^talk 12:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The company is covered in tons of sources and even several pages of books if you search on Google. The venture beat articles look like funding notices but the articles are quite in depth and I think Bloomberg along with plenty of sources online make this a very notable company. SunnyScion (talk) 15:20, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I disagree with the nominator's assessment of the Bloomberg and Fast Company sources. Both provide WP:SIGCOV of the company. The Fast Company source is a list, but it's not an ORGTRIV-excluded list; it includes several paragraphs of discussion about the company. I'm not sure an adequate WP:BEFORE search was done, either, as there are many SIGCOV sources not included in the article; see Bloomberg BusinessWeek, CFO magazine, eWeek, and Risk Management magazine. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I see more than enough sources, several of which were highlighted in the table. Bloomberg is pretty significant coverage, at least to me. Sir MemeGod  21:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:ORGTRIV says inclusion in lists of similar organizations, particularly in "best of", "top 100", "fastest growing" or similar lists, not inclusion in lists of similar organizations, particularly in "best of", "top 100", "fastest growing" or similar lists, but it'll be OK if the listicle has a bit of text about the company,. Literally every single listicle will have enough content by that metric, because they will all introduce each of the subjects with a paragraph or two of waffle. What is lacking, is any actual evaluation or analysis, any secondary content beyond the routine, run-of-the-mill "about us" text that is included in literally every single other listicle of dozens of companies. As for the other Bloomberg article, I cannot positively identify which one is referred to since there is no bibliographic information given and the link used is a session link that is useless unless we're on the same computer (and has no doubt expired regardless) but the only other Bloomberg article I could find in Business Source Complete or Business Source Ultimate is AN 150764891, also available from Yahoo, or Bloomberg directly (Sebenius, Alyza (8 June 2021). "JBS Hackers Took Data From Australia and Brazil, Researcher Says". Bloomberg.com.). Said article is one of those where the company in question comments on a few things, there is virtually no content about the company itself. It does not in any way even approach ORGDEPTH, there is no need to ask about ORGIND. As for the WP:TRADES articles mentioned, there is zero explaination why they overcome the presumption against independence. An example of the coverage in eWeek Kerner, Sean Michael (11 February 2016). "SecurityScorecard Detects, Rates Security of Third-Party Suppliers". eWeek. TechnologyAdvice, LLC. ISSN 1530-6283 – via EBSCO, AN 112958089., which is the exact type of WP:SPIP that we have WP:TRADES exclude. All in all, I'm not sure it's really appropriate to cast stones about anbody else's BEFORE. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I used Ebsco permalinks so they should work if logged in via the Wikipedia Library, but here are the references if you want to look them up:
- "A Heightened State Of Security." By: Chapman, Lizette, Bloomberg Businessweek, 00077135, 3/13/2017, Issue 4514
- "Keeping Score". By: Katz, David M. CFO. Apr2017, Vol. 33 Issue 3, p29-30. 2p.
- "Cyber Scorekeepers". By: Banham, Russ. Risk Management. Nov2017, Vol. 64 Issue 10, p26-29. 3p.
- You found the eWeek article. eWeek is not a WP:TRADES publication, it's a more general business technology publication (a la Infoworld or Wired). Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The subject has tons of sources that do not appear in the reference list. I'm certain there is enough material to establish notability. I suggest keeping and improving this article.DesiMoore (talk) 15:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Plenty of their rankings that get coverage, there isn't anything about the company that isn't a PR item that I see in my search. The table above/below my comment seems to sum up the sources. We just don't have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 22:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cilento International Poetry Prize

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

The sources here are little more than WP:ROUTINE, any content here can be covered on the Empathism article. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Italy. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete, well i just redirected Empathism, slogging through the sources i couldn't find anything really useful. fiveby(zero) 14:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Routine local coverage of an award connected to Menotti Lerro's followers of his "manifesto" and so-called "cultural movement", Empathism. Sign off on the Empathism manifesto, and you become a member, or an "adherent" and then you get awarded the prize. All the awardee's are in Lerro's circle, therefore I do not think it is a legitimate award, I think it is a promotional award. Netherzone (talk) 16:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to my !vote above, delete per WP:PROMO, WP:NOTADVERTISING, and WP:MILL. Netherzone (talk) 23:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Menotti Lerro

AfDs for this article:

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

All right, I'll bite, this article is probably not notable. The refbombing makes it really hard to assess the quality of the sources, but even then, it seems most coverage is either WP:ROUTINE or about the movement he founded, empathism. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Italy. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the previous deletion discussion (here [14]) is informative as per source quality. I would additionally suggest salting. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Many of the sources are local, and many are written by followers/adherents/members of his so-called "cultural movement", Empathism, who have signed his "manifesto", therefore are not independent.

Netherzone (talk) 16:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Visual arts. Netherzone (talk) 15:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As I'm slogging through the 94 ref-bombed citations I am finding that many of these sources are user-submitted content, blogs, things written by his Empathism adherents and members, and some sources don't mention him at all. The article is bloated with content supported in this way, and I do not think it should remain in the encyclopedia, per WP:PROMO by the two now-blocked sockpuppets (see: [15] and [16]). Also WP:TNT, and WP:NOTADVERTISING may apply. Netherzone (talk) 22:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Flight 227 (1969)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT. Was not able to find any sources for the entire flight. Although it does meet WP:PLANECRASH, that isn't a formal guideline or notability policy. Sir MemeGod  12:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Russia. Sir MemeGod  12:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: There exists no reliable independent (significant) news coverage of the event, no secondary sources, no in-depth coverage, no (sustained) continued coverage, no demonstrated lasting effects and/or 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) 14:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Aeroflot accidents and incidents in the 1960s. Incident is sufficiently covered there. Meltdown627 (talk) 16:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•Weak Keep per amount of fatalities, i feel better sources can be still found about this accident. I'm saddened to see so many notable Aeroflot incidents have to go, but i feel this could be saved. @Sir MemeGod Lolzer3k 17:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While it did have fatalities, the only source we even have to back up the fatalities is an archived Russian site, which I'm not even sure is reliable. As stated, WP:PLANECRASH doesn't apply here, as it isn't a deletion policy. Sir MemeGod  17:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the Aeroflot accidents and incidents page. This was an unattributed translation of an ruWiki article, so they don't have any additional sources. Even if this did meet the GNG (I'm assuming the sources would mostly be Russian-language 1960s era stuff), I concur with Meltdown627 that coverage is not so sufficient as to merit a standalone page. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 20:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aeroflot Flight 227 (1956)

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT: There exists no reliable independent (significant) news coverage of the event, no secondary sources, no in-depth coverage, no (sustained) 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) 12:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Georgia (country). Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per WP:GNG, nomination and potentially WP:HOAX (this may very well have happened). I can't find any significant coverage of the flight, when looking up "Aeroflot Flight 227" I actually came upon a "Fake plane crash" Fandom page, and that's the extent of what I found. SirMemeGod  12:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Crash is not a hoax, it did happen. It is mentioned at ASN and B3A. Meltdown627 (talk) 16:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Do you have links to those? It would be useful to see what info they have. Mrfoogles (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Nevermind, found the link on the list article Mrfoogles (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Aeroflot accidents and incidents in the 1950s. Incident is sufficently covered there. Meltdown627 (talk) 16:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to previously mentioned article; sufficiently covered and attributed to a reliable source. Mrfoogles (talk) 17:42, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Bianchi

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

Fails to satisfy WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG (given most sources provide WP:ROUTINE coverage. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, and Switzerland. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment if she was the subject of an entire book, that is far beyond routine coverage, no? PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The book in question is a book written by her [17], at least if the ISBN of the supposed book is correct. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from the description, I am unsure. It contains a catalogue of her artworks (hence her listing as the author) but says it has writings from other people. The publisher also lists it as having an editor who is not her. Don't have the time to look into this right now. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maratha campaigns in Gujarat

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

The article attempts to present very different and completely unrelated conflicts as a single conflict. The article is a clear case of WP:SYNTH. The sack of Surat in 1664 which the article presents as the beginning of the conflict was carried out by Shivaji prior to his coronation. This conflict is then connected by the article to the raids by the Dhabade Maratha clan which has no connection to Shivaji's raid. This is then listed with the Peshwa-Gaekwad conquest of the region which again has nothing to do with the beforementioned conflicts. No WP:RS has been provided that treats these separate conflicts as a singular one. PadFoot (talk) 11:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 26. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kristian P. Lusardi

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

Fails WP:SPORTCRIT or WP:CRIMINAL. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Crime, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:58, 5 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!} 06:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Move~~ to Christian Lusardi and leave a redirect. More sources available when you search for his "other" name - Christian Lusardi. PsychoticIncall (talk) 11:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC) (I'm striking your duplicate vote as I assume the most recent one is your current opinion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC))[reply]

PsychoticIncall, "Move" is not a possible AFD closure as it is an editing decision. If you are interested in that outcome, you have to vote to "Keep" and then have a Move discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Plenty of sources at his "other" name. PsychoticIncall (talk) 11:36, 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!} 06:07, 19 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, Owen× ☎ 11:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melvin Storer

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

Being mistakenly reported killed during the attack on Pearl Harbor doesn't make this sailor notable (unless he was supposedly killed by the Germans). Clarityfiend (talk) 02:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, California, and Oregon. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete as WP:BIO1E, despite some coverage. Mztourist (talk) 05:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yes non-notable person. Xegma(talk) 06:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Redirect coverage passes GNG: The Oregon Daily Journal 2 3, The Oregonian 2, Herald and News ~~and also meets WP:ANYBIO with the Asiatic–Pacific Campaign Medal. 1~~ but also a case of WP:BIO1E. The Attack on Pearl Harbor could be an appropriate place for a redirect, but the subject does have enough WP:SIGCOV at Newspapers.com to justify a standalone article.

Filmforme (talk) 06:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A low-level decoration does not confer notability. Only the Medal of Honor, Victoria Cross, or multiple second-level awards do that. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Literally millions of Americans were awarded the Asiatic–Pacific Campaign Medal. Best, GPL93 (talk) 12:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. What about the Bronze Star? Filmforme (talk) 15:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a blanket campaign level medal, but still well below the ANYBIO line which is generally the highest military honor awarded by the subject's nation. Additionally, it appears he was not actually awarded the Bronze Star Medal but rather had bronze service stars on his campaign medal which denote how many specific operations or campaigns participated in within the overall Pacific campaign. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BIO1E. Best, GPL93 (talk) 12:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GNG. He was involved in two events: the attack on Pearl Harbor and the salvage effort (which I consider deserves its own article even though it has not got one). WP:BIO1E is a guideline that provides advice but does not trump WP:SUMMARY, which says that sections of long articles can be spun off into their own articles. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He didn’t play a notable role in either event, though. And it is still an event and the aftermath of the event. All we have is quick (1-2 paragraph) snippets in local newspapers (ie: "local man re-enlists") except for his mistakenly being reported dead for six days (which still garnered only local coverage). This was incredibly common at the time. Best, GPL93 (talk) 01:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete An ordinary sailor, doing ordinary things.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have been updating the article, including more information I've found at Newspapers.com. There's no question the subject passes WP:GNG, but it is my observation that some may not agree of the reason why he was written about, and not that this isn't a notable topic according to WP:NEXIST.

Storer was not the only one who was considered lost in the attack and later found alive. But it should be noted that his family and home state of Oregon was not notified he survived for weeks, only after they had a funeral service involving Portland's Mayor. The ordeal of Storer initially being lost during a heavily covered historic event is what likely triggered the WP:SIGCOV from media once it turned out he had survived. In addition, he has a first hand account and unique perspective of his own experience, and his involvement with the salvage afterwards.

As for WP:BIO1E, this is a unique case and I agree with @Hawkeye7 that Attack on Pearl Harbor is a long article to consider a redirect. The subject meets WP:NBASIC, though a shorter article covering Storer and others in similar circumstances would be suitable too. WP:PSEUDO applies here and there is coverage on the subject unrelated to the attack: to their expertise as a diver searching for people that were believed to have drowned. 1 2 3 –Filmforme (talk) 22:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Rather routine military career (that is rather briefly described here) and after the war doesn't seem to be much more notable. Reported as passing away Pearl Harbour, then surviving is more of a trivia item than a notable item for wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A lot of additional sourcing was added since this article's nomination. I'd appreciate editors reviewing the article now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:42, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Got coverage for quite a while after the initial incident; a bit on the BIO1E side but the article in its current state is pretty decent, and the event is well, quite significant. As a more specific aspect it doesn't really duplicate much from the event article. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The references in the article show it passes WP:GNG. If WP:BIO1E applies, a significant portion of this article should be moved retained in a new article titled something like "Incorrect reports of the death of Melvin Storer" per WP:GNG. McYeee (talk) 23:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Diamond

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

Questionable notability for Australian bureaucrat. Most sources discuss the RTBU rather than Diamond. Insufficient WP:RS to meet WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 02:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Law, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Profile is sufficing the WP:BLP and WP:Notability. As per the WRS, here's the link providing his mentions on multiple government official websites as well as on Parliament of New South Wales' official website. Article can be made concise rejecting the poorly sourced information. Here are the links below I have found during research validating his notability.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/rail-unions-given-24-hours-to-call-off-industrial-action-20220901-p5bepf.html

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/sep/06/sydney-train-strikes-union-boss-hopes-federal-intervention-puts-go-slow-on-nsw-government-action

https://www.rtbu.org.au/mark_diamond_appointed_as_new_rtbu_national_secretary

https://www.rtbu.org.au/who_s_who

https://www.actu.org.au/directory/rail-tram-and-bus-union-rtbu-national-office/

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/dominic-perrottet-told-to-call-gladys-berejiklian-as-rail-feud-continues/news-story/12176af725b86627d3612ee8ee0a7586

https://www.rtbu.org.au/national_council_2023_wrap

https://rtbuexpress.com.au/rtbu-owned-training-organisation/

https://www.rtbu.org.au/resignation_of_national_secretary_mark_diamond

https://www.railexpress.com.au/rtbu-appoints-new-national-secretary/

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/compromise-in-the-jobs-summit-confrontation-in-the-foyer-20220901-p5bemu.html

https://www.fullyloaded.com.au/rtbu-names-new-national-secretary/

https://www.busnews.com.au/rtbu-says-federal-budget-a-turning-point-in-public-transport-funding/

https://www.themandarin.com.au/198708-perrottet-and-rtbu-attend-summit-as-industrial-actions-continue/

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/organisations/registered-orgs/139v-r2022-201.pdf

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Hansard/Pages/HansardResult.aspx#/docid/HANSARD-1820781676-96367

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/sep/01/dummy-spitting-nsw-government-gives-rail-union-24-hours-to-end-industrial-action

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-21/wallan-train-derailment-union-says-track-awaiting-maintenance/11987230

Tamaraharon (talk) 17:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

rtbu.org.au would be a primary source. LibStar (talk) 03:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would be helpful to get an assessment on this huge list of links so we know whether or not they are reliable. Tamaraharon, it would be helpful if you made this live, active links.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:33, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Australian Rail Tram and Bus Industry Union~~Delete~~ I had looked at this article when it was first listed, and found many of the sources identified by @Tamaraharon so this was quick work. Aside from the primary sources, these are mostly just Diamond being quoted in an article which I don't think qualifies for notability.

I see one source that qualifies for notability in the whole pile -- the Sydney Morning Herald article, #11 below -- which can be seen as significant and independent coverage from a major news outlet. The Guardian article #16 has a bit of editorial independence but it's really short - basically quoting him and then quoting someone reacting to him.

[18] - quoting MD only
[19] - quoting MD only
[20] - primary
[21] - primary
[22] - doesn't mention MD
[23] - quoting extensively with some editorial independence (but no independent reporting about Diamond)
[24] - primary
[25] - primary
[26] - primary
[27] - all material about him is from RBTU employee, lacks independence
[28] - independent, significant, about Diamond
[29] - same as railexpress.com.au article #10, lacks independence
[30] - quoting MD only
[31] - mention only
[32] - all material about him is from RBTU employee, lacks independence
[33] - quoting MD, plus very brief coverage
[34] - quoting MD only

Oblivy (talk) 13:39, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I highly doubt your assessment of sources because the pages that you published, you have cited primary sources, even press releases of the same company website. Here's the example Tam Jai Noodle#cite note-10 , Tam Jai Noodle#cite note-11, High Sierra Music Festival#cite note-2, High Sierra Music Festival#cite note-3. In fact, most of the sources in your pages are weakest and lack reliability so i believe your assessment of sources on Mark Diamond page is bias. Tamaraharon (talk) 17:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:BIO which is the applicable notability guideline, an article needs to be supported by "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject".

On the other hand, primary sources are explicitly allowed for articles even though they do not count for notability, per WP:PRIMARY: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources".

I hope this is helpful.Oblivy (talk) 01:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Article should be converted to a stub using only independent reliable sources. This justifies WP:Notability. Chris.lee auth (talk) 18:04, 19 September 2024 (UTC)— Chris.lee auth (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Weak Keep: Primary sources usage does not consent lack of notability. Profile has moderate recognition on gov website of Parliament of New South Wales. Subject has historical relevance.

Rpgea (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The opinion of experienced editors who were not canvassed here would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sejal Gupta

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

Fails WP:ENT and general notability guidelines. No significant contribution to films TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 11:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To films, no, but she's in the main cast of the TV series Kya Haal, Mr. Paanchal? and her career as a teen beauty pageant has received some coverage. Maybe an ATD exists?-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 11:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Haryana, and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saquib Rizvi Memorial Marathon

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

Can't find anything to suggest notability; alsost all hits are facebook or YouTube &c. TheLongTone (talk) 14:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and India. Shellwood (talk) 16:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 19 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!} 10:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no evidence of notability. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't meet notability criteria, no sources available at all. Ratekreel (talk) 21:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mollenkopf

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

A small office supply company. All the references about it are press release wire stuff and ultra-low-value business churnalism. I can't find any significant coverage of it in any reliable source. I don't think this company passes WP:NCORP or WP:GNG at all. A PROD on this basis was removed in 2013. There isn't a DE.wikipedia article about it; I don't think there ever has been. Note that there are a couple of other German companies with Mollenkopf in their name, but they're unrelated companies in different markets. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 09:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 09:27, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 09:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. More or less per nom, after a (second) search for sources. The article was started as a copyvio of the company history, in German. (That page has not been archived in its then form; the current company history page is here, but I can't get it to show me anything but the first date-point.) The creator, VIGIL150, subsequently translated part of it, leaving out the rest. I cleaned up the translation, restoring the omitted bits and (I hope) avoiding copyvio, and listed the company history as source. (My version.) But I didn't find any further coverage, so I PRODded it. All of this was in October 2013. A UK IP deprodded it, in the same edit adding, in a list under the existing "Sources" heading, 5 additional sources that they described as independent. 3 of these are from "pbs", which looks like a business magazine but is the marketing consortium mentioned in the text. One of those is irretrievably dead. In any case several of the 5 are mere mentions; for example the one with the misleading link text "awarded 'face of the industry'" is about a "company face of the year" award and just lists Mollenkopf's exec. as coming third. The best of the lot is the last, a short article on the ecological advantages of online procurement that appears to cite Mollenkopf as its only example. The article has remained substantially unchanged since, and I find no evidence the company has achieved notability. (I can't even substantiate the Avis Best of Germany award.) Yngvadottir (talk) 09:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC) ... PS: The same user created an article on the company at de:Mollenkopf (Bürobedarf); it was speedy deleted as promo and non-notable. Yngvadottir (talk) 09:54, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rusty Shoop

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

Another dime-a-dozen TV weatherman article, with hardly any content since its 2008 creation that fails to establish why subject is notable. Sources before and after death are primary, with no viable third-party coverage. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 08:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 08:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:47, 19 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!} 10:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: news coverage is strictly upon his passing; "loved local weatherman dies" is about the extent of each article. I don't see notability, was very much a local person, not meeting our requirements. Oaktree b (talk) 15:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to KERO-TV#Notable_former_staff: with that source, for example https://www.bakersfield.com/news/weatherman-turned-anchorman-rusty-shoop-never-had-to-be-anyone-but-himself/article_415ac964-664d-11ef-9fbc-13199f92fb97.html -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at the Golden 1 Center

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the Golden 1 Center (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. Significant referencing problems. mikeblas (talk) 15:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and California. Skynxnex (talk) 16:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: These three sources (all independent, secondary, and reliable) collate entries of this list topic together as a group, thus satisfying WP:NLIST criteria. Left guide (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are just schedules (and they only cover 2024), so they don't satisfy WP:NLIST because they're not significant coverage. -- mikeblas (talk) 17:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have a point; I hadn't previously inspected the sources in that manner, but now I have. In that light, delete. Left guide (talk) 23:24, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 19 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!} 10:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at the Olimpiyskiy Stadium

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the Olimpiyskiy Stadium (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. No inclusion criteria, very weak referencing. mikeblas (talk) 14:43, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 15:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:28, 19 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!} 10:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at AsiaWorld–Expo

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at AsiaWorld–Expo (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. mikeblas (talk) 14:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Hong Kong. Shellwood (talk) 15:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:28, 19 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!} 10:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Liverpool Arena

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at Liverpool Arena (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. mikeblas (talk) 14:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 15:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 19 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!} 10:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Movistar Arena (Buenos Aires)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at Movistar Arena (Buenos Aires) (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. Contains only events since the end of 2019, only concerts. Completely unreferenced. mikeblas (talk) 14:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Argentina. Shellwood (talk) 15:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is "soft deletion"? What attributes make an article eligible or ineligible for soft deletion? -- mikeblas (talk) 13:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, mikeblas,

For policy, see WP:NOQUORUM. Basically, Soft Deletion is treating an AFD discussion with low attendance as a PROD, proposed deletion. They are seen as uncontroversial deletions and if an AFD closes as a Soft Deletion, this allows an editor to ask for the article's restoration at WP:REFUND. AFD closures are not eligible for a Soft Deletion if a) there are any Keep votes (hence deletion is not uncontroversial) or b) an article has been PROD'd before or brought to AFD before. Does this explain things sufficiently? Many AFDs that have been relisted but have no participation or just one editor arguing for "Delete" are closed as Soft Deletions. It can be seen as preferable to additional relistings which may or may not result in additional participation. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. I hadn't heard of that AfD outcome before. But your note is confusing; isn't every AfD "already at AFD"? Therefore, none would ever be eligible for "Soft Deletion". -- mikeblas (talk) 09:59, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I meant a previous AFD discussion, prior to the one that the article is currently involved in. And Soft Deletion isn't uncommon, if you look through a past AFD daily log page, you'll see plenty of discussions with that closure especially these days now that the number of editors participating in AFD discussions has decreased. With some AFDs, we are lucky to have 3 or more editors voicing their arguments unless it is a hot button subject like those involving current political situations. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:44, 25 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!} 10:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Central Harbourfront Event Space

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at Central Harbourfront Event Space (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. Weakly defined inclusion criteria. mikeblas (talk) 14:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Hong Kong. Skynxnex (talk) 14:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:26, 19 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!} 10:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Civic Arena (Pittsburgh, PA)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at Civic Arena (Pittsburgh, PA) (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. Weakly defined inclusion criteria. mikeblas (talk) 14:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Pennsylvania. Skynxnex (talk) 14:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't the list notable as a group? There are other arenas of similar size listed that have similar lists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_events_by_venue Jasonstru (talk) 17:22, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This list isn't notable as a group because it fails WP:NLIST. WP:OTHERSTUFF doesn't mean this is notable. (Also, note that many in that category have been already nominated for deletion.) -- mikeblas (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:26, 19 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!} 10:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at the Toyota Center

AfDs for this article:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex

Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the Toyota Center (2nd nomination)

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

Fails WP:NLIST overall, as the content of the list is not notable as a group. Seems to fail WP:NOTDB. mikeblas (talk) 13:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Lists, and Texas. Skynxnex (talk) 14:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:25, 19 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!} 10:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yonas Maynas

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

not reliable article per WP:BIO or General Notability Moarnighar (talk) 13:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Internet, and Africa. Skynxnex (talk) 14:50, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The nominator is currently under ANI review for questionable editing behavior. -- GreenC 17:25, 15 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!} 07:23, 19 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!} 10:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cai Haojian

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played a couple of minutes in the Chinese Super League, as well as a loan in the third league. Sources are WP:ROUTINE and I don't see anything else that can help it pass. Geschichte (talk) 07:22, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and China. Shellwood (talk) 10:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:07, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 12:58, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – Chinese sources (sports.sina.com.cn) demonstrate the minimum to establish WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 12:32, 25 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!} 10:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clapton Kibonge

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

Declined G4. Article was previously deleted under a different name at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mugisha Emmanuel. Subject does not seem notable enough for a standalone article, at least not at this time, and clearly fails WP:NACTOR. CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:53, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Rwanda. CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:53, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG, WP:NACTOR, and WP:CREATIVE. He lacks significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions and has no significant coverage on his projects as a film writer, director, nor producer. — YoungForever^(talk) 15:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 10:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benz Circle Flyover

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

Imagine if every flyover in the world had an article in Wikipedia. Lacks WP:N. Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there are sources present. The nomination statement seems to be dismissing the article based on its subject, not the sourcing available Garuda3 (talk) 16:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth Ward (author)

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

Fails WP:GNG, couldn't find much else online. GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Magic, Entertainment, and New Zealand. GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Yes, the article needs some work, but I believe the subject is notable. TheSwamphen (talk) 09:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any sources that could establish notability? GMH Melbourne (talk) 10:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the two press sources in the article seem pretty good. There's also this, this, this, all from a quick and non extensive search. His books have several reviews on Gale and Proquest which help him pass WP:NAUTHOR/ Also many interviews with RS. A pretty decent article could be written here, IMO PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Sources identified above seem fine, we have some reviews of the body of work as well. Ok for AUTHOR notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per above. Ratekreel (talk) 21:47, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Boross

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

Doesn't meet WP:CREATIVE with only minor roles in various TV and music. I can't find any sources getting close to discussing him. This is just the latest iteration in attempts to promote him as a speaker going back to 2014 (I've already removed that). SmartSE (talk) 08:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No RS available which cover the topic significantly, to establish notability. Ratekreel (talk) 21:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SDSS J082535.19+512706.3

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

No significant or non-trivial coverage in media or studies, not in a catalogue of note, not visible to the naked eye, and not discovered before 1850. SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:10, 2 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!} 06:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: a quasar of no particular note. I could find no significant commentary. Non-notable. Praemonitus (talk) 16:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, doesn't meet WP:NASTRO. 21 Andromedae (talk) 19:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to list of most massive black holes. The mass of the black hole on the quasar is known, but I am unable to find any significant coverage on the object itself. Galaxybeing (talk) 02:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nomination, a failure of WP:NASTRO. Sir MemeGod  15:19, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looks like XFDCloser errored again, going to pop this on the log so that someone actually sees it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amir Emdadi

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

Not convinced that there's enough here for WP:NBIO/GNG. The awards do not come across as notable, and I'm not really seeing SIGCOV. KH-1 (talk) 07:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Iran. Shellwood (talk) 09:30, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The article history shows it was stuffed with fake references to spoof notability. Mccapra (talk) 11:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination and Mccapra. The few reliable sources that I can find in Persian simply repeat his claim of being the Guinness World Records holder for his 786 inventions, which is demonstrably false. Wikishovel (talk) 13:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tangiers Group

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

it lacks substantial independent, reliable sources to demonstrate the company's notability. Much of the content appears promotional, with limited third-party coverage or critical analysis, which are essential for establishing the significance of the company Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malta-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of works for cello and piano by women composers

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

Is "works for cello and piano by women composers" somehow a notable intersection of characteristics? Seems like a random grouping of two separately notable characteristics. Fram (talk) 07:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Lists. Fram (talk) 07:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see what is random about allowing Wikipedia users to find compositions by women composers for cello and piano. Every performer is nowadays asked to include works by women in their concert programs and information about them is still very hard to find. What better place than Wikipedia to offer this information. The list can be updated by anyone and there is no danger that it reflects only one person's taste. Celloville (talk) 08:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ITSUSEFUL. There are countless combinations of characteristics which could be useful for some readers (such works by country, by period, by length, by mood, by difficulty, ...), but if the combination is not the subject of commentary in reliable sources, it is not a good subject for a Wikipedia list. Fram (talk) 08:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom for failing WP:NLIST and maybe WP:SALAT too ("one-eyed horse thieves from Montana"). Clarityfiend (talk) 10:26, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SALAT. This may be a random grouping of three characteristics: cello and piano and women. This particular intersection of characteristics is not encyclopedic nor has it received precise professional commentary, regardless of whether it is useful for those trying to strategically program a concert. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Volte (company)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Lots of paid PR, routine business news. scope_creep^Talk 07:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete to establish the company's notability, as there are no significant independent, reliable sources demonstrating its impact or widespread recognition. Additionally, the content primarily reads as promotional, lacking the necessary depth or critical coverage required. --Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 09:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Cooke (musician)

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

Lots of passing mentions for the man and an interview but nothing else. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 07:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Venomous Concept, the one band for which he has been a consistent long-term member, and for which he is most often mentioned in the music media. Otherwise he is one of those pro working musicians who has filled in with various bands when needed and worked some session and solo projects, but remains little-covered in his own right. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brock Frost

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

Semi-advertorialized rticle about a city councillor, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NPOL #2. As always, city councillors are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show evidence that they should be seen as special cases of significantly more nationalized notability than the norm -- but this is showing nothing of the sort, and instead is trending in the direction of trying to promote his post-council business as a mortgage agent, and is referenced entirely to the type of run of the mill local coverage that's merely expected to always exist for all city councillors in their local media, except for a single brief glancing namecheck of his existence in a national newspaper article about somebody else, which isn't support for notability and doesn't even support the sentence it's footnoting anyway.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a lot more sourcing and substance than this. Bearcat (talk) 06:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 06:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to Cornwall River Kings. Per nom. Bkissin (talk) 14:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He Qianqian

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

It does not meet the notability guideline for musicians. Frost 05:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and China. Shellwood (talk) 09:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jades broken

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

The article doesn't meet the requirements of WP:N. Frost 05:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and China. Shellwood (talk) 09:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - searching on the Chinese name and on Liu Nan's Chinese name, all I find is Wikipedia, 2 articles on Medium, not a reliable source, and one Taiwanese library recording its book holdings. This does not look like a notable subject. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Integrated stove

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

The article doesn't meet the requirements of WP:V and WP:N. Frost 05:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No case has been made why sourcing is insufficient. Cortador (talk) 05:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Claims like "the integrated design reduces gaps and corners" are unverified. Also, note the tone in the article, it's unencyclopedic. Frost 05:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP Cortador (talk) 06:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no usable content in this article. Frost 07:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or maybe a redirect to Stoves. There really isn't anything here that can be used. There are academic sources but they don't really add anything of real value to the article. If you google 集成灶 you'll get stoves. Dr vulpes (Talk) 08:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, probably with Stoves but open to other suggestions. The problem is that the words in English mean different things. It appears that there is a level of consistency in China, but I don't have the ability to read local language sources to determine overall whether it has specific meaning there. But there is certainly use in other parts of the world which mean different things - for example whilst we are told that in China is means several different kitchen appliances in one unit, in other places it might just mean that individual appliances are "built in" to the overall kitchen design. I think at this stage the best option is to merge until it is clear that there is specific meaning shown in the third party sources. JMWt (talk) 10:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that was my problem as well. What I think it means, and this is a guess, is that it's a stove that also has an integrated vent. At least that's what I see when I google "集成灶" and go to images. Dr vulpes (Talk) 17:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Edward Le Sage

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

Fails WP:NPOL + GNG. KH-1 (talk) 05:03, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The award is not notable. Mccapra (talk) 11:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Failed candidates do not meet NPOL. Bkissin (talk) 14:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clear fail of WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Not much extra sourcing found beyond what is in the article. Edwardx (talk) 23:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Y2cl

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

Likely to fail WP:NWEB/GNG KH-1 (talk) 04:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Webcomics and Internet. Shellwood (talk) 09:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frontiers of France: minor modifications since 1815

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

This is a very strangely titled article that discusses several minor territorial adjustments to France's borders with three different countries. The only sources in the article were published by the French government, meaning that there is no indication that these minor border changes have received any significant coverage outside of the relevant documents themselves. Aside from that, the vast majority of the article is completely unreferenced. The topic is also far too broad, as it would include every single "minor" French border adjustment since the end of the Napoleonic Wars. That type of article would be an indiscriminate collection of information. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 04:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Politics, Andorra, France, and Switzerland. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 04:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Territorial evolution of France (of which this article claims to be an "appendix", a rather odd concept on enwiki). I don't see any original research issues here: in addition to the references given, there are also references in the corresponding section of the frwiki article and the detailed articles linked from it. Notability of the subject as a whole isn't in doubt either, though perhaps the information could be summarised as part of the merge. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Territorial evolution of France seems like the best option here. Dr vulpes (Talk) 08:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as above. Mccapra (talk) 11:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Show (band)

AfDs for this article:

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

No appearance of notability. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Pennsylvania. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and WP:GNG. Lots of information here, but trying to verify any of it turns up crickets. Article was written by a 1-edit SPA apparently to promote a 2016 tour, and has remained essentialy unchanged ever since—except for adding even more promotional material, this time in support of a new venture involving the band's front men. StonyBrook _babble 12:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:51, 19 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!} 04:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The promotional bloat of the article is lamentable, but that's fixable. The City Paper and Post-Gazette sources substantiate the band did international tours and got international radio airplay, which is sufficient to pass WP:MUSIC. Chubbles (talk) 13:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Visakhapatnam Metro

AfDs for this article:

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

Never actually took implementation stages. Politician dream. WP:TOOSOON. No developments from a very long time. Also this article says no metro to Visakhapatnam.- https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/politics/040821/no-vizag-vijayawada-metro-rail-for-now.html. Thewikizoomer (talk) 05:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of speculations within the article as well. Thewikizoomer (talk) 05:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Andhra Pradesh. Shellwood (talk) 09:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:50, 19 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!} 04:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete much of this seems to be copied from a promotional brochure. A planned project can be notable but I don’t think we’ve reached that threshold. Mccapra (talk) 11:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next Manipur Legislative Assembly election

AfDs for this article:

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

Deleted in May, recreated and speedy deletion refused on basis of "new" sourcing. However, the sourcing in the article does not indicate anything of substance about the next election. The Hindu article simply notes a quote from one politican saying they should win the 2027 election. Sangai Express has nothing. North East Today quotes a politican indicating they will field candidates in 2027. Simple evidence that an election will occur in future is not enough to satisfy notability criteria. At this point, fails WP:NEVENT, WP:GNG and WP:CRYSTAL. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 04:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and Manipur. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It’s a future event which has no set date, but which is possibly years away, with no absolutely set candidates, and nothing but guesswork in sources.

Absurdum4242 (talk) 17:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already at AFD before so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:47, 19 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!} 03:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete We can't have an article which primarily consists of "TBD". There is not enough information as of yet. Should have been speedied. AusLondonder (talk) 15:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Navaratnalu

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

Looks like a complete advertisement. Complete promotional, appears to be a political advertisement done in favour of a political party and its leader.

Looks like a pamphlet for the political party. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Politics, Economics, and Andhra Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment it documents a notable political initiative in Andhra Pradesh, India, which played a significant role in the 2019 state elections. The program, introduced by the YSR Congress Party, has had substantial media coverage and political impact, making it relevant and notable within the context of regional politics. --Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it is indeed an advertizemant for mr jagan Mohan Reddy 2402:8100:21EF:9051:0:0:3D9D:BAF6 (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Santhwanam 2

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

Probable failure of the notability guideline for films, but the more pressing concern is the amount of sockpuppetry this article has attracted. I didn't think it was appropriate to tag this under CSD G5, as a few other editors have worked on this, but at least two socks have edited this, and most of the rest comes from IP addresses that have edited the same articles as the socks and geolocate to the same city, suggesting block evasion. I also have concerns about the sources, many of which look like paid promotion disguised as news coverage, and a quick look for better ones did not reveal anything promising. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, India, and Kerala. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The IPs have removed the redirect three times now despite the three editors who disagreed so I guess here we are. Sad we have to be here over SOCKing. Judging notability outside of the editor conduct, it fails WP:NFILM as there is no significant coverage. Out of the 12 sources on the page, only one could possibly be used. The rest are unreliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES or WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pandian_Stores_2#Adaptations: of which this is an adaptation. Not opposed to Keep at all given the existing coverage. Opposed to deletion. Note: the page was accepted through the AfC process, for what it's worth. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dōkyūsei 2

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

Article does not meet notability per WP:GNG and from my searches there is not significant coverage per WP:SIGCOV. Demt1298 (talk) 03:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Anime and manga. Demt1298 (talk) 03:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, A review in a Spanish print magazine Superjuegos: [35] and an article by IGN Japan: [36]. Saturn version of the game has reviews by three different print magazines and at least one preview: [37]. There's also a preview of the remake by Automaton (published by Active Gaming Media): [38]. --Mika1h (talk) 09:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Thanks to Mika1h for the search so I didn't have to. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pu Zhongjie

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

Declined prod. Prod was removed with a source that is a 1 line mention of Pu. Created by a single purpose editor. Google news has a mere 2 hits. Would reconsider if significant coverage can be found in Chinese. LibStar (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Medicine, and China. LibStar (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Katharina Valenta

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

Article does not meet notability per WP:GNG and my search produce no significant coverage per WP:SIGCOV. Demt1298 (talk) 02:26, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, History, Sexuality and gender, and Italy. Demt1298 (talk) 02:26, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Natashas Project

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

Article doesn't meet notability per WP:ORG or WP:GNG and my searches have produced no significant coverage per WP:ORGDEPTH Demt1298 (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Dance, Crime, and Organizations. Demt1298 (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Kingdom and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SouthSouthNorth

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

Fails WP:NORG. No in-depth coverage in independent, reliable sources. C F A 💬 01:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Environment, and South Africa. C F A 💬 01:43, 19 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!} 00:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Speedy keep; withdrawn‎. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Richard Fontaine

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

Despite being a prolific writer of op-eds and magazine articles, Fontaine is not himself the subject of any WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources. (The closest example is a press release-based WP:ROUTINE article about his appointment as president of CNAS.) As a result, there's no pass of WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. No other SNGs appear to apply. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Washington, D.C.. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:25, 12 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!} 01:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have found independent and reliable sources with Fontaine as a subject and added them to the article: feature in The New York Times, article of The Sydney Morning Herald, and interviews with CBC Radio and The Hill TV. If my understanding of the guidelines mentioned is correct, he qualifies for an article.LindsaySR (talk) 20:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Could we get a review of these newly found sources and whether or not they help establish notability?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:42, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It wasn't mentioned in the article but he released a book over the summer called "Lost Decade: The U.S. Pivot to Asia and the Rise of Chinese Power". I've added it to the article and included three book reviews, he now appears to meet WP:NAUTHOR. The book reviews came from the South China Morning Post, Australian Institute of International Affairs, and the Small Wars Journal. Dr vulpes (Talk) 04:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing the sources added to validate his pass on WP:NAUTHOR I am withdrawing the nomination. Speedy keep. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:27, 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.

Ibrahim Agha (Algeria)

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

Article sounds more like a book than a Wikipedia article. Henry (talk) 00:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Royalty and nobility, and Algeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the subject is plainly notable. Some of the article needs to be rewritten and looks to me like a cooyvio anyway, though I can’t get the source to load. Mccapra (talk) 03:47, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "Hussein's reaction" section was translated directly from this page: https://web.archive.org/web/20130612123908/https://www.algerie-ancienne.com/Salon/Galib/8France/01expedit/17staoueli.htm I also checked the "Early life" section but did not find copying there. Other sections may also have copyright violations or close paraphrasing, but it's unlikely the entire article has been copied or translated directly here, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gold Apollo AR924

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

Doesn't seem to pass WP:NPRODUCT. Seems only notable within the context of the 2024 Lebanon pager explosions, and doesn't appear to warrant a standalone article. Article did not exist prior to the explosions, nor seemingly any reliable sources covering it, failing the "sustained coverage" requirement of NPRODUCT. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Technology, Taiwan, Lebanon, and Hungary. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Copying here what I wrote when I WP:PRODded this article yesterday:

This particular model of pager seems to be notable only in the context of the 2024 Lebanon pager explosions. I can find no mention of "Gold Apollo AR-924," "Gold Apollo AR924" or "Gold Apollo AR" outside of news sources reporting the Israeli bombings. "Gold Apollo pager" returns only results for these news articles, the company's website, patent documents, and similar. The sources currently cited at the article fail the criteria for addressing the article topic "directly," as in the "significant coverage" criteria of WP:GNG.

While the particular model of pager is likely to receive a good amount of (temporary) media scrutiny from a few outlets, this will likely be only in the context of the above-mentioned bombings. Although WP:SUSTAINED does not apply to non-BLP articles, WP:NPRODUCT does, and although secondary sources refer to this particular device, there seems to be no claim to notability outside of this single event, for which we already have an article. Thus, I believe this article fails to establish notability for the topic, and our status as not an indiscriminate collection of information is applicable. Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The model exists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x50wwGjX2Ao

and

https://web.archive.org/web/20240917160632/https://www.apollosystemshk.com/product/42.html Mheretakis (talk) 23:06, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, we know it exists, that's not the issue being discussed. Oaktree b (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be wise to wait as evidence unfolds, hiding the page ,may be misinterpreted as corruption even though it is not. 38.9.2.102 (talk) 11:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody here is suggesting this information should be hidden. Information about the attack has it's own article. The only information specific to this article is just the features of this device, which are not secret. This discussion is about if this article is notable enough to exist, not if it should be censored. Thank you 2603:6011:9440:D700:CC1F:F350:E9EB:5F48 (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No other model of pager produced by the company exists on Wikipedia, information related to this product should be at most made a small section on the manufacturer's page. Beyond recent events, it is otherwise completely irrelevant to anything other than the company. JohnWarosa (talk) 01:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete was a completely non-notable model of pager until this recent news story. Andre🚐 01:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ → Speedy keep. This is a weapon used in an attack. With up to 4000 victims, the event can have multiple articles. Possibly move to BAC Consulting. The technical details of the pager are not important, but the supply chain is. Note, that other weapons (talkie-talkies) were also used in the attack. The key question the article needs to answer is who made the pagers and who is responsible for their safety, Gold Apollo or BAC Consulting. Protecting Gold Apollo from bad publicity is not a reason for deleting the article. If they go bankrupt because of this, they fully deserve it. They had a responsibility to protect their trade mark.

P.S. - Wikipedia has an article on Stuxnet, but no article on the attack itself or the damage it caused. The Stuxnet article focuses on the weapon and on how it was delivered. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is very flawed. The weapon was the explosives. Stuxnet was specific malware that exploited four zero day Windows vulnerabilities, and the article is about the engineered malware, and not about the model of USB drive it initially infected. But also that argument is off the point. The pager product is only notable if there are reliable independent secondary sources that significantly discuss the pager (not the attack, but the actual pager). Do we have any such sources? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Petri Krohn; There is an article for the attack itself. Parham wiki (talk) 13:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am now changing my !vote to speedy keep. It is becoming evident that the AR924 was not just some random Gold Apollo pager intercepted by Mossad (presumedly), but it was designed and manufactured by the Israelis using the Hungarian company BAC Consulting as a front. This implies that this was a multi-year Israeli operation, started in 2022 at the latest. This covert operation is distinct from the bloodshed that happened in Lebanon this week. I am redirecting BAC Consulting, to the article, as evidently the fake company had no other purpose than to produce these killer pagers.

@Parham wiki; Thank you for the link to Operation Olympic Games. In the Stuxnet case the article on the weapon is ten times as long as the article on the attack itself. I believe we will see a similar trend here. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - Someone has stated Draft:BAC Consulting. I have suggested that it be merged to Gold Apollo AR924. The company is a fake front, established solely to produce the AR924 killer pagers. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 20:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should only bold one of your keeps. By convention at AfD we only bold our !votes once. Also you have not specified a speedy criterion. I don't think any are eligible. I think you mean you are moving from keep to keep. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:53, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Gold Apollo#2024 Israeli tampering and explosions in Lebanon per WP:REDUNDANTFORK, WP:SPINOUT, and WP:LENGTH. The parent article has existed since 2014 and has plenty of room to house this information, which is already there in its essential form. No need to delete this highly searchable term since it is a verified product which has been rendered notable by recent events. Havradim leaf a message 01:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Many thousands of these devices exploded the other day, injuring, maiming or killing nearly 3000 people. This device is now by far the most notable pager/beeper ever made. This device is at the very center of one of the most dramatic and historic espionage and irregular warfare operations in human history that is certain to be studied and analyzed for many years to come. Already, numerous reliable sources worldwide are discussing this device in great detail, and it boggles my mind that some editors think that this article should be summarily removed. Cullen328 (talk) 08:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The flaw in this argument is that the exact make and model of pager that was manipulated does not provide justification for an article. Similarly, we have Bulgarian umbrella that details how umbrellas have been rebuilt into a murder weapon - but without creating an article on the actual model of umbrella that was modified - exactly because the make and model of the modified implement does not in itself provide it with notability. Lklundin (talk) 11:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that model may have only been made as a weapon by a covert manufacturer. Hungary denies involvement, says BAC was just a legal front. The page should be about AR924 the weapon. Keysersmoze (talk) 09:38, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that the discussion of this device and the supply chain should be in the main explosion article, which is currently a small fraction of the size that would warrant a WP:SIZESPLIT. Hemiauchenia (talk) 13:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per arguments of Cullen328. PhotographyEdits (talk) 09:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per the arguments of Cullen328 the information about the attack is highly important. A separate article on the pager that itself is notable only for the attack prevents a centralized and well organized presentation of the information on these explosions. Lklundin (talk) 09:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or move to BAC page. Please count my vote. Flegozoff (talk) 12:04, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Votes are not counted, consensus is determined based on the strength of arguments. PhotographyEdits (talk) 12:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The event is a historical first time. This product became important, indeed people looked on Wikipedia for this article (and it is good that they found it).Sinucep (talk) 14:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The device is notable. Whether or not it was notable a week ago is irrelevant. —danhash (talk) 14:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it? What sources do we have? I asked this above and so far we have been presented with no sources to consider. We are looking for significant coverage of the product in multiple reliable independent secondary sources. No amount of saying it is notable is good enough. Where are the sources? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are currently 19 sources on the article —danhash (talk) 16:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which of these meet WP:NPRODUCT and WP:SIRS? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep I am a deletionist when it comes to mobiles, and similar devices. But as this device was a centre/key point in a major attack, many reliable sources have covered the device significantly (thus meeting WP:significant coverage) making it pass the WP:GNG, so it doesn't have to pass WP:NPRODUCT specifically. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are already articles for both the attack and the company who had the pager manufactured. Some information could go there. There are a lot of sources mentioning the pager, but only in the context of the attack. Specific coverage is lacking. Cortador (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The alleged usage of this device in Lebanon makes this particular model of pager notable, regardless of whether similar models are on Wikipedia. Those similar models did not just explode in masse, killing and injuring people. 96.45.23.79 (talk) 15:19, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If it was not notable before, the major attacks using this device make it notable now. Keeper of the Queen's Corgis (talk) 16:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Edited and updated, not deleted. It should be about the AR924 mass produced and used in conflict weapon, not an article about a pager model. The story is developing and it appears this model may have only been produced as a weapon and not in Hungary which was a shell front. As a page about a weapon, it should be kept for the same reason "Little Boy" has a page, even though no one heard about it until after it exploded over Hiroshima, and it was also only used once. I am sure there is a page about the Manhattan Project, and one about the Hiroshima bombing. Yet the bomb itself has its own page. Notable weapons, especially the first of their type, need their own page because weapons have a design, explosive type and mass, range and effect, delivery method, an assembly, a development process, country that developed it, countries that possess it, number produced, uses in war. The AR924 is clearly notable for reasons mentioned by others and some of the reasons Little Boy is notable. Keysersmoze (talk) 08:44, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Keeper of the Queen's Corgis and Cullen328, but most of all per Keysersmoze's comment above. The first instance of an entirely new kind of weapon; mass-manufactured booby-trapped remote-detonated personal devices. — The Anome (talk) 07:56, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if these are specifically manufactured as a booby trap device and are not a standard pager that was modified with a logic board and explosive, then it clearly becomes notable. But, what are the secondary sources that show this please? We have a lot of keeps, but still there is still no source discussion at all. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment given this article is not notable outside the attack on Hezbollah - and given half the article is about the attack, what if this page is deleted and a brief summary of the features of these pager's features is added to 2024 Lebanon pager explosions, as it could provide a little context as to why Hezbollah chose these pagers. Once deleted, this article and BAC Consulting should redirect to 2024 Lebanon pager explosions, as both are solely notable for that attack (BAC Consulting was created exclusively for the attack; it can't be notable for anything else). If these pagers were used in another completely separate attack, or were popular outside of Hezbollah/Lebanon and Syria prior to the attack, then I would keep. However, that is not the case. We don't have a crystal ball, but it seems unlikely very many people will buy this specific brand after this incident.2603:6011:9440:D700:CC1F:F350:E9EB:5F48 (talk) 13:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with 2024 Lebanon pager explosions - the model was at the center of the attack, and outside of it is not notable. 三葉草 San Yeh Tsao 18:18, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As the story behind the logistical “capture” of the Hezbollah supply chain gets into the public domain, it will ensure the notability of the Gold Apollo AR924 as a weapon. Article is also already available in three other languages. Sobaka (talk) 10:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While right now this device is mentioned only in conjunction with the 2024-09-17 Lebanon pager attack, I'm pretty sure that more details will become public in the near (and not-so-near) future.

Some of these details - especially these relating to the attack design and implementation - would be verrrrry interesting to lots of people, e.g. your humble servant. Deleting this page would deprive potential contributors of the "Base Hook"for their contribution. Note that Wikipedia has several pages devoted to essentially similar attacks, e.g. The Moscow US Embassy "Great Seal" attack ^[1] or the Washington DC USSR embassy "Xerox 914" attack. ^[2] Cshenorr (talk) 20:46, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Keep The AR 924 is undoubtedly the most famous pager in the world today, and in any case even before the explosions it was one of the most famous, as demonstrated by the sales figures and the fact that Hezbollah chose this model, which was therefore already known in some countries where the mobile network is not as developed. It certainly owes its current fame to recent events, in the same way as the iPhone 16, which for now is only famous because it was released 10 days ago and no one is surprised that it has a separate entry.--Giammarco Ferrari (talk) 15:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no one has provided any example of which sources meet WP:NPRODUCT. If someone is looking for this pager model they will be interested in the pager attacks where this is already mentioned. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:12, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cullen328. Senior Captain Thrawn (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep After the edits made to the article, the article clearly improved in its content and references. There is no doubt that there is no greater reason for its deletion, considering the current state of the article, which has improved quite a bit, significantly. 181.197.42.150 (talk) 03:23, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting this discussion as I don't see a consensus yet. A few remarks though. As Sirfurboy states, there has been very little discussion on sources that would demonstrate notability rather than this pager just being "in the news". I will mention that since its nomination at AFD, this article has doubled in size. As an aside, it might be useful to not think of this article as about a pager and instead about a military weapon. We have plenty of articles about specific military weapons, from rifles to bombs and tanks, so that might be a better comparison than comparing to other articles about tech devices.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Doesn't meet notability for products. Coverage is largely from the last few days, nothing before this time. Non-notable product a week ago, nothing sustained. Unless this happens again with the same product, I don't see notability at this time. There were also Icom radios used, so this article doesn't represent the entirety of the story. Oaktree b (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't necessarily think of this as a weapon, it was one of two used in the attack (the other being an Icom radio). It could be written about under the pager explosions article where we can cover both items used in the attack. My concern is also that there is no information about the "walkie talkies" used in the same attack; I can't see neutrality when we so extensively cover one of the two items used, while completely ignoring the second. Oaktree b (talk) 15:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2019 African Entertainment Awards USA

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

Sensational and routine coverages. Fails the inclusion criteria for events. Best, Reading Beans 00:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am bundling these two here per my nomination statement.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Nigeria, and United States of America. Reading Beans 00:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device)

[2] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Monopoly

[1]

[2]