Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 15

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< September 14	September 16 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

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

The result was no consensus‎. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Big Church Festival

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

I boldy merged this article over a year ago, but just noticed that my redirect was reverted in October. This festival fails WP:NCONCERT/WP:NCORP (which I think applies because this is a non-profit festival, i.e., an organization that puts on an event once a year). I have been unable to find sustained, in-depth coverage of the festival. As there is still merged content in Christian music festival#Worldwide, I propose restoring the redirect. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Events, Religion, Christianity, and United Kingdom. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There seems to be be enough coverage to warrant the page to be kept and improved on. cyberdog958^Talk 02:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should not count Event Industry News toward notability; per WP:TRADES, there's a presumption against using industry trade publications to establish notability. Christian Today and Cross Rhythms are both from 2015, hence why I noted this event lacks sustained coverage. Those are the only sources with SIGCOV I could find; the rest of the coverage I've been able to find are routine announcements that particular bands are performing at the event. In sum, two reviews from 2015 isn't enough to establish notability in my view. Cross Rhythms is also an interview with the founder, which means it lacks independence. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep as per the Christianity Today piece and the Cross Rhythms piece which has a significant coverage prose introduction before the interview part, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:36, 8 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!} 23:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Promotional. Irrelevant. with hardly any reliable or independent references--Alon9393 (talk) 18:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant is a personal opinion not a notability factor and promotionalism can be edited out, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 18:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This editor frequently argues an article is relevant or irrelevant, I'm not sure what that means. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:07, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep: Looks irrelevant and not sure about the notability of the subject.Santoshsah4 (talk) 07:51, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by [l]ooks irrelevant? If you're not sure about the notability of the subject, why do you think this article should be kept? voorts (talk/contributions) 20:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Santoshsah4. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Insillaciv (talk) 16:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Telecommunication & Computer Industries Consortium

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

Fails WP:NORG. No significant coverage. C F A 💬 23:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and Iran. C F A 💬 23:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The article says almost nothing, the Google search results are all Wikipedia mirrors, and the listed website is defunct. It is not impossible that there are Farsi-language references; it seems unlikely at best and I don't know what to search for. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SNOW - no coverage. Bearian (talk) 21:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nomination, fails WP:GNG. Sir MemeGod  22:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Psephos

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

The article unfortunately doesn't meet WP:NCORP or WP:GNG I was unable to find anything in a google search. A few results came back in a Google Scholar search but all the result I could see were onty citations and therefore did not provide significant coverage on the topic. GMH Melbourne (talk) 23:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries, Politics, Internet, and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 23:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 23:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this non-notable archive of election results, it is mentioned in one source (duke University, seems to be a fragment of ??). In the EL's there is a link to the archive creator's personal blog. Cannot find enough to establish notability per GNG. Netherzone (talk) 00:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak Keep~~ this is used as a reference in at least 300 Wikipedia articles. [1] and [2] are library directories that refer to this source. The sourcing isn't as good as I would like, ~~but my !vote is keep~~. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Psephos is only a marginally reliable source, due to Carr being a subject matter expert. I don't think it being used as a reference on Wikipedia is a good argument for keep, and neither is the fact that Psephos is in several libraries. Steelkamp (talk) 08:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking to see if there might be a case that Adam Carr is notable. But all I found was Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2006-06-19/Adam_Carr. After further review, there isn't enough here for a keep vote. Walsh90210 (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable entity on its own, with no reliable sources. The editing spirit (talk) 18:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify Let the article incubate in draftspaceEEverest 8848 (talk) 11:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Delete per a lack of WP:RS and a failure of WP:GNG. Sir MemeGod  22:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kawaihae (band)

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

Fails WP:NBAND. No significant coverage. C F A 💬 23:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Japan, and Hawaii. C F A 💬 23:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete an unsourced article about a band from the 2000s (decade); most of the Google search results are about songs by Brother Noland, Israel Kamakawiwoʻole, etc and their website is broken. The Apple Music/Amazon search results suggest the band probably existed, but that isn't enough to keep the article Walsh90210 (talk) 01:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I wasn't able to find any coverage of the subject in reliable sources. Very obscure. toweli (talk) 09:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete unsourced, and seemingly unsourceable given the obscurity of the band. Article itself is dated, with “planning to release an album in 2009”, which, while not itself cause for deletion suggests a complete lack of enthusiasm on the part of the original editor of the page - they just gave up. Absurdum4242 (talk) 06:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Between the probable socking and the lack of emphatic keep !votes I think we're clear to axe this one. asilvering (talk) 19:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Tharwat

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

Egyptian actor of dubious notability. Sole provided reference does not cover subject in depth, nothing better found in English, but better references may be available in Arabic. Possibly eligible for a G5 speedy because author has been blocked as a suspected sockpuppet, but taking to AfD on the off chance that evidence of notability can be found. --Finngall ^talk 22:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Egypt. --Finngall ^talk 22:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Theatre. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep the subject appears to pass WP:ENT because he “has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.” On the other hand sourcing isn’t great. There are a couple of other Mohamed Tharwats (not actors) and some of the sources about this one are chatty interviews but I found 1, 2 and 3 after a non-intensive search. Mccapra (talk) 08:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article is an unreferenced list of productions that he may or may not have acted in. Nothing would be lost be deleting, and if anyone ever wanted to write a real article about him with, y'know, sources, they could do that at any time. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:30, 11 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, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to A Little Romance. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thelonious Bernard

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

Article fails WP:NACTOR and WP:ANYBIO. He’s only appeared in one film. Although he was nominated for a Young Artist Award only once; #1 of ANYBIO states that “The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times” The Film Creator (talk) 22:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. The Film Creator (talk) 22:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't delete the page for Thelonious Bernard. "A Little Romance" was so important to me when I was a 15-year-old and saw it in 1979. I'm sure a lot of us girls had a crush on this actor when we saw him perform with Diane Lane. He is an important part of American history. Really. Thank you. 2601:602:867F:8690:5BA2:7670:D9FE:1C75 (talk) 23:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to A Little Romance: Fails both NACTOR and GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 12:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to A Little Romance. If there is any source other than IMDb, it would be good to explain his life in 1-2 sentences in the "Cast" section of that article. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. and I don't see a relist bringing about consensus Star Mississippi 00:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lil Tony (Georgia rapper)

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Could not find sources to establish either this or WP:ANYBIO. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Georgia (U.S. state). Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Pitchfork and HIp Hop News are RS, we also have decent coverage in [3]. Not much coverage, but that's three sources and more than most articles we see in AfD Oaktree b (talk) 14:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b Pitchfork and HipHop News are definitely reliable sources, but they do not provide the relevant significant coverage that we're looking out for. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Hip Hop Canada link I added above adds context, with the three, I think we have musical notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your stand, by the way :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:21, 2 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!} 23:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I don't think Oaktree's sources add up to enough coverage to call this a WP:GNG pass. -- asilvering (talk) 20:08, 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!} 23:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep per Oaktree. The notability isn't great, but it is (probably) sufficient. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per Oaktree b. There's also this article by BroadwayWorld, and it's worth noting that the rapper is signed to Priority Records. Admittedly, it seems to be a borderline case of notability. Mooonswimmer 16:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Not a very strong keep, but a keep nonetheless. asilvering (talk) 19:57, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olivia McIsaac

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; no significant coverage. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:09, 1 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!} 23:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep: The InsideHalton article already in the article, combined with [[4]] each provide WP:SIGCOV about the subject which allows for the WP:GNG to be met. Let'srun (talk) 13:18, 14 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!} 23:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with the second source. Looking at Proquest there are numerous other Halton/Burlington articles about her as well - but that's from the same source. Nfitz (talk) 19:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : The subject looks notable. EEverest 8848 (talk) 11:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Challenge Cup (Austria-Hungary). asilvering (talk) 23:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Gramlick

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

Fails WP:NBASIC. No significant coverage. C F A 💬 22:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket, Football, Austria, Hungary, and England. C F A 💬 22:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Nothing that supports its own article, the relevant information about the subject is the competition created by him. Svartner (talk) 00:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not enough coverage to establish notablity for a standalone article. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 08:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Challenge Cup (Austria-Hungary), @Svartner and Vestrian24Bio: The article for the Challenge Cup seems maybe to be an important part of the history of football for the region, although severely under-sourced. My recommendation would a redirect to the article, as he is mentioned there and it's pretty much already whats on this article. Your thoughts? Regards, Govvy (talk) 14:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Redirect. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 14:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He doesn't seem to have any relevance as a search term. Svartner (talk) 14:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CHEAP applies. Giant Snowman 20:14, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. Giant Snowman 18:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect seems fair. AA (talk) 13:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect is fine. Bearian (talk) 21:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Challenge Cup (Austria-Hungary): per Govvy's rationale. Sir MemeGod  22:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Newsweek. asilvering (talk) 20:00, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johnathan Davis (businessman)

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

All the references listed are about businesses and organizations that they were apart of and not about the person themselves and I can't find any other coverage about them. Does not pass WP:NBUSINESSPERSON or WP:ANYBIO. Propose to redirect to Newsweek. cyberdog958^Talk 23:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, News media, and Business. cyberdog958^Talk 23:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The reference Meet The Mysterious Duo Who Just Bought Newsweek is a profile of Davis, as is Faith and a media icon: Newsweek's unconventional new owners (which is characterized here as "a lengthy profile of IBT founder Johnathan Davis". --The Cunctator (talk) 13:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t think I would consider this source a profile of Davis as it’s more about his business partners along with most of the other references on the page. The second source is more promising but I don’t think that one source is enough to satisfy WP:SIGCOV. cyberdog958^Talk 19:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Significant coverage "addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." Seems pretty cut-and-dried to me. But if we want to change the goalposts, go forth. --The Cunctator (talk) 13:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Newsweek, and add in there anything that seems vital. I don't see enough independent sources for GNG and I don't think we can rely primarily on Newsweek itself as a source. If, in the future, there is more written about him then an article would make sense. Lamona (talk) 05:02, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Newsweek, and possibly a selective merge. There’s just not enough coverage in sources independent of him, about him, except for a couple of stories about lawsuits he’s been involved with. Bearian (talk) 01:10, 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!} 22:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep‎. Thanks for finding those. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 14:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isla Ñ Rum

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

No indication of GNG notability. C F A 💬 22:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Argentina. C F A 💬 22:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Added some RS. I am unsure if the La Gaceta source is independent, given they have published a string of articles that read as promotional, but it seems maybe more ideological, given they are conservative and want to breathlessly cover entrepreneurship, but still coverage is SIGCOV. The La Nación source is good, although may not be sigcov. The El Cronista source is good. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 06:55, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of college football coaches with 30 seasons

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

There doesn't appear to be the needed WP:SIGCOV covering this particular grouping to meet the WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 20:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, American football, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 20:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Unlike the other coaching lists recently nominated (e.g., coaches with zero wins, most ties, etc.), the topic of longest-serving head coaches does have some sources on topic. E.g., Longest-serving college football coaches. Cbl62 (talk) 23:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Agreed with Cbl62, BEFORE searches identify enough articles on the subject of long-serving coaches to meet GNG, even if there is arbitrariness to the choice of a 30-year cutoff. (As an aside, columns showing teams and divisions would really help this article). Aspirex (talk) 21:55, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 21:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the general topic of "longest-serving head coaches" is regularly discussed in news outlets etc; the "30 seasons" cutoff is not but there is an editorial need to have some limit to the list. There is no need to ref-bomb the article, as it is largely statistical in nature. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: the general topic of longest-serving CFB coaches seems to have sufficient coverage available to satisfy WP:NLIST (i.e. Yahoo, 247Sports, Business Insider, in addition to what's presented above). If the article title needs to be tweaked to more closely align the scope with source criteria (or lack thereof), then that's an editorial decision that can be handled separately, but not a matter for AfD. Left guide (talk) 00:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. asilvering (talk) 23:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faliyu (housing)

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

No significant coverage of the topic. Article at present is just a dictionary definition. C F A 💬 21:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, Religion, India, and Gujarat. C F A 💬 21:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete seems to be a WP:DICTDEF of the Gujarati word for "neighborhood". No sources, and a cursory search for "ફળિયું" (Gujarati) found nothing. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can we redirect to Pol (housing)? Bearian (talk) 22:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No sources on the page and so no coverage on the word. Fails WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 13:51, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Withdrawn‎ by the nominator. (non-admin closure) LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 21:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump International Golf Club shooting

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

No notability (fails WP:NEVENT), no injuries. Could redirect to Trump International Golf Club if a section is made. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 21:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn, I was unaware (or inattentive) of the current merge proposal. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 21:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 23:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hamdan Dammag

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

No indication of notability per WP:BIO or WP:NAUTHOR. Notability is not inherited from a famous parent. I am unable to find multiple reliable sources discussing the individual in a significant way. The article was also possibly written by the subject himself. ... discospinster _talk 20:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Computing, and Yemen. ... discospinster _talk 20:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this page was created by @Dammag, probably the same guy this article is about Abo Yemen ✉ 19:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - very slight coverage about the person. Ping me if you find enough for WP:SIGCOV. Bearian (talk) 21:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ^Complex/_Rational 22:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jungle Fever 2: Primal Fury

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

I initially PRODed this article with the following rationale: "Non-notable series. The article is completely unsourced, and searches did not turn up any kind of coverage in reliable sources at all. The only biggest claim to notability in the article is winning a non-notable award. Fails the WP:GNG." It was later de-proded with the reasoning of "At least consider a redirect, this being a sequel". However, I can find no article on the film that this series is a sequel to, so there is no eligible Redirect target that I can come up with. So, I am sending it to AFD with the same rationale as the original PROD. Rorshacma (talk) 20:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Internet, and New Zealand. Rorshacma (talk) 20:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. In fact, I did not find anything about the two movies online. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom; it is unclear what it is a sequel to. The only Google search result is a webcomic forum that has broken Youtube links. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first sentence of the article says it's a sequel to 48Hours. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz No, 48Hours is the film jam in which the first film was created. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, 48Hours is a New Zealand short film competition that the original movie was created for, not the name of the first movie. This article later states that the original film was just called "Jungle Fever" (which, of course, is unrelated to the actual theatrical Jungle Fever film). Also, despite this article claiming that the original was an "award winning" 48hours film, it is not listed on the competition's article as having won anything. Rorshacma (talk) 14:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and other commenters. There’s next to nothing about this movie or the movie it is a sequel to online and even the few crappy sources that do exist disagree on what it is, with some calling it a movie and others a TV series. The article itself is also of very poor quality and seems to have been at least partly copy pasted from its short themoviedb.org entry. Archimedes157 (talk) 15:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, clearly does not meet notability criteria. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 02:20, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No sources on the page. Fails WP:GNG. I agree with all the other Delete votes here and without sources it is very unclear what sequel is this of and this definitely has nothing to do with Jungle Fever film. RangersRus (talk) 22:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:24, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ICL 20s World Series 2008–09

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

Not enough coverage on reliable independent sources; Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's also the following with the same condition...

ICL 20-20 Indian Championship 2008–09 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
ICL 20-20 Indian Championship 2007–08 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
ICL 20s Grand Championship 2007–08 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
ICL 20s World Series 2007–08 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 17:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Cricket, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. No WP:LASTING impact either. AA (talk) 13:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ALL. The world series started on 23 November in 2008 and canceled three days. Series has no lasting impact and no significant coverage. All the others listed in this AFD fails WP:SIGCOV and had no notable significance. RangersRus (talk) 14:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all no WP:SUSTAINED coverage, so separate season articles are not needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. asilvering (talk) 20:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montreux Declaration

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

As the arrested people were all released after a few days I cannot see how this is significant enough to deserve an article. As an alternative to deletion as it is so short this unsourced article could be merged into the treaty article. Although there is no Turkish article I think if it was merged enough sources could be found for at least a few sentences. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Military, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah I have now found the Turkish article and linked it Chidgk1 (talk) 17:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah the Turkish discussion voted to keep so if properly sourced maybe it should be kept per https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipedi:Silinmeye_aday_sayfalar/103_emekli_amiral_bildirisi ? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Full disclosure, I wrote the article. I do understand why not being ref'd would be a ref flag for deletion, yes. And thanks for delving in the the Turkish Wikipeda. But hear me out.

It was a somewhat significant event in modern Turkish history, and not a one-day wonder. Ten or fifty or a hundred years from now some non-zero number of people reading Turkish history are going to see it mentioned and want to know more. (And remember, we ought to try to be global and work against (natural) bias against foreign events.)

It doesn't matter if the people were released in a few days. The hearing was publized and acquitals can be notable.

It's short, but reasonable size for an article. We have a lot of articles that short. And it can be expanded somewhat.

Yeah there are no refs and I marked it such so that other editors could add them. There are sources (I didn't make any of the material up). Not adding them was an uncharacteristic lazy lapse on my part, to leave the work to others, I never do that and I don't remember why I did here. And I can see why no refs would be a red flag for the article not being worthwhile. Still, for deletion, it is not supposed to much matter if an article has refs but whether it can have refs with reasonable effort.

A rule of thumb is that if an article meets the WP:GNG that's an indication (not proof, granted) that the article might well be worth keeping. GNG wants in-depth coverage from multiple reliable, neutralish, and reasonably notable sources. Here's a full article from Associated Press, Here's a full article from Bianet, Here's a full article from Hurriyet Daily News. There're more, and that's just the English articles.

Pretty close to case closed I would think?

(Also, a gentle reminder, you are supposed to do WP:BEFORE before nomination, and I guess you didn't cos I found these quickly in Google. I know, I know, many nominators also don't do it, but IMO they really ought to to save us all time and not have worthwhile articles sometimes deleted. I understand, but hopefully a learning experience here?) Herostratus (talk) 18:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep: per Herostratus. Notable event with implications spanning a significant time horizon. Plenty of sources exist. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:23, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aniq Raushan

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

Failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played 5 games in Singapore. Geschichte (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Singapore. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:22, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aiman Zavyan

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

Failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played 298 minutes in Singapore. Geschichte (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Singapore. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails GNG and Sportcrit. Sources won't help much. Old-AgedKid (talk) 08:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 14:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:22, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hariysh Krishnakumar

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

Failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played 168 minutes in Singapore. Geschichte (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Singapore. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 00:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shahrulnizam Mazlan

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

Failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played 10 games in Singapore. Geschichte (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Singapore. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Greek exonyms in Turkey

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

I can see someone has put a lot of work in here but it has been tagged unsourced for a long time, so as someone who cannot speak Greek how would I know if it is true? If this is notable why is there no list on Greek or Turkish Wikipedia? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Greece, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Entirely original research; even if totally accurate, it would require WP:TNT and a rewrite with sourcing. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete obviously it's a copy paste from a page like this. There are many such pages of dubious validity circulating on the Greek internet. Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Procedural close, speedy keep‎. Malformed nomination per my comment within. With no easily discernible nomination rationale (thus inability to attract editors to form any meaningful consensus), the nomination also has all the appearance of a tit for tat nomination. No prejudice against a well formed, policy rationale based nomination at any time, even immediately. (non-admin closure) 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ada-George Road

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

Why the page should be deleted Cfaso2000 (talk) 16:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The subject lacks coverage in independent sources. Only one article with a headline referencing Ada-George road was provided. This doesn't satisfy Wikipedia's GNG. Reference 1 merely mentioned the subject; Ref 2, a 189-word news article mentioned a robbery incident on Ada George Road and didn't cover the road in and of itself; Ref 3 Ada-George was mentioned twice but was not the subject of the article or its content; Ref 4 is about the flagging off of the River's 12th Flyover, located on Ada George. This doesn't confer notability. There's more coverage of the 12th Flyover, than the Ada-George Road. Both are not one and the same." Cfaso2000 (talk) 16:44, 15 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 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Transportation, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment : A geographic features does not need an independent source to survive as long as they are from reliable source especially on places that are populated by humans. Go and read Notability on Geographic features and what Independent source is all about. Independent source was never mentioned because the government cannot pay the news to talk about a place. Now go and read this Newspaper even tho it wasn’t listed on the article. Further more, Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low. Even abandoned places can be notable, because notability encompasses their entire history. Go and read WP:GEOFEAT. A lot I can tell you per Wikipedia guideline but I feel this is enough for you to pick up from there. I live in Port Harcourt for 5 years and schooled there before I left and thought of writing about it’s place and taken beautiful pictures, that is how I also came about Choba, Port Harcourt and also took the picture you can see there because Wikipedia is knowledge.--Gabriel (……?) 18:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Topic notability for county roads, regional roads (such as Ireland's regional roads), local roads, streets and motorway service areas may vary, and may be notable if they satisfy the WP:GNG criteria". This is found in WP: GEOFEAT. Ada-George Road has not had wide coverage in secondary sources, and there are only minor mentions of it in news sources you provided. Are there any notable history behind this road? Provide sources please. As it stands, it fails GNG. Cfaso2000 (talk) 19:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From your contribution so far aside from this AFD it’s just a waste of time communicating with you. Until you are familiar and understood the guidelines. I will rather channel that energy to something more reasonable to communicate with except you wanna learn about Wikipedia from me. Read before you throw out lines. Ada-George has nothing to do with County roads, regional roads, local roads, streets or a motor service area. It it’s a town popular known as Ada-George Road. Do you read or you just pop out explanation?. I have check the county road article and the regional road article the images over there has nothing to do with Ada-George. In Ada-George they are houses over there and street because it’s a town but in those article you provide the images shows no houses but a county road that is why they need enough coverage than just a place that is legally recognized. County roads and streets are not legally recognized. For example, Rigasa Railway Station is not a town or a community it’s just like a motorway service area of which you just mention. So it needs enough coverage from reliable source to satisfy WP:GNG. You get my point?. You said There's more coverage of the 12th Flyover, than the Ada-George Road. it is not popular called the 12th flyover but the Ada-George fly over. The Ada-George has being in existence before the fly over and I just pop out a newspaper for you which was published 13 years ago of when the Ada-George was in construction without the flyover to proof it has been in existence. Have a nice day. This is enough explanation for you and I’m ending it here. Cheers. Gabriel (……?) 20:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Close: I am finding this AfD difficult to understand. I do not see a deletion rationale. I suggest a procedural close with no obstacle to re-nomination, even in as short a time period as "immediately" if a policy based rationale is provided. This appears to be a dispute between two editors rather than a real deletion discussion 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. It would be helpful if the sources from the Turkish language article could be moved over to the English version. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:16, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kardeşlerim

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

I don’t understand how this could get past the new page patrol without sources. Or is the iMDB entry enough for them? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The tr.wiki article has twenty sources. Mccapra (talk) 17:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Coverage exists; awards and nominations mentioned in TkWp page, for example, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaziosmanpaşaspor

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

Talk page suggests it be considered for deletion Chidgk1 (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Football. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, no reason to delete. Third-level club with lots of coverage during many years. Geschichte (talk) 17:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Geschichte, needs improving not deleting. Giant Snowman 18:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per Geschichte. Svartner (talk) 00:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably keep Although I find it a little odd I wasn't so good at finding the best sources, but again just because there are no sources on an article, doesn't mean they don't exist. Perfect example of WP:NEXIST. Govvy (talk) 14:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Plenty of coverage by news and other publications, some of which are on Google Books and Scholar Aintabli (talk) 18:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sean Lessard

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

As researcher not notable; books are not helping with notability either. No reliable sources. Once upon a daylight dreary (talk) 16:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets GNG based on significant coverage in three news articles that are about him and his work, and three book reviews on his work in peer-reviewed academic journals. Netherzone (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Education. Netherzone (talk) 18:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. For me, three reviews of coauthored books would be borderline for WP:AUTHOR, but the profiles of him in national media are enough for WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree with David Eppstein. Josh Milburn (talk) 13:59, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fırat University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine

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

As we already have an article for the uni why do we need this unsourced article? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Biology, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it seems like text page or draft --Loewstisch (talk) 10:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lightmatter

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

Trivial media mentions - CV like page with no deep coverage Once upon a daylight dreary (talk) 16:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and Massachusetts. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination --Jiaoriballisse (talk) 11:49, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep‎. (non-admin closure) — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 20:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Reiter

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

Unlikely to pass GNG and anybio. Not enough substantial coverage in reliable secondary sources; Once upon a daylight dreary (talk) 16:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Ohio. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep - meets criteria #5 of WP:NACADEMIC as holding a named chair position, the Albert Bowers Endowed Chair. Additionally has an h-index of 59, his work has been cited over 16,000 times by others; and he has won quite a few notable awards. Note to nominator: WP:ANYBIO states that Many scientists, researchers, philosophers and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources. Netherzone (talk) 17:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC) Modifying my iVote, I agree that Speedy is in order. Netherzone (talk) 00:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. Citation record looks like a plausible pass of WP:NPROF C1, even in a higher citation field, and I think that the endowed chair passes WP:NPROF C5. Speedy since the nominator did not consider the correct notability criterion. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per Russ Woodroofe; the correct notability guideline was not consulted, and when consulted, it is passed. XOR'easter (talk) 20:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep as above. The nominator might like to withdraw this mistaken nomination. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep‎. Withdrawn. asilvering (talk) 23:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2016–17 Turkish Cup

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

There is certainly a lot of numerical data here but unfortunately the only reference is one of the regulations not the scores Chidgk1 (talk) 16:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, highly notable. Do you know what the Turkish cup is? Geschichte (talk) 17:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did not know what the Turkish Cup is but the article on it is a reasonable size, so I cannot see the point of keeping this article as the scores in it are not sourced Chidgk1 (talk) 04:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the national cup competition in Turkey, clearly notable - nominator has not done a BEFORE. Giant Snowman 18:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly the Turkish Cup is notable and that article already has many stats including scores in the finals Chidgk1 (talk) 04:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Passes on WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 00:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep Really now, like GS said, just do a WP:BEFORE, yes the article lacks sources, but that by no means does not make it a notable competition. Govvy (talk) 10:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Govvy Finding a source for the preliminary, 1, 2 and 3 rounds and checking it against the article might be easy for you but it is not for me Chidgk1 (talk) 11:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are you wanting exactly? You can mirror the scores, like this one with soccerway, that can be used as a citation for stats, then you have sources like tntsport, [5]. There are Turkish news services which I don't use where you can also pick sources from, but sorry Chidgk1, I feel this is a bad nomination and not thought out. Regards. Govvy (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All the results are now sourced. As the only reason given for nomination was that the results were not sourced, can we now close this.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes thanks very much Chidgk1 (talk) 06:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. asilvering (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2014 İstanbul Cup – Singles

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

The only reference is the draw and the article was tagged re missing cites ten years ago. So is the reader just supposed to trust the Wikipedia editor for the scores? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Tennis and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've fixed the references using the links from the WTA website [6]. If there's an issue with referencing, please look for sources yourself and try to have a go at fixing it yourself instead of taking the page straight to AfD and expecting everyone else to fix things on a timer. Related WikiProjects can help out if you're not familiar with a particular subject matter. Iffy★Chat -- 09:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the reasons given by Iffy above. Agree also that taking the page straight to AfD is making a mountain out of a molehill. Yimingbao (talk) 10:59, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Article creator has been unable to convince anyone else that this player is notable. asilvering (talk) 20:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oleksandr Pshenychnyuk

AfDs for this article:

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

New sources are either from the league in which he plays or are basic WP:ROUTINE coverage about a specific game with no meaningful coverage of the player himself. This is not WP:SIGCOV. Anwegmann (talk) 15:50, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The new sources (sport.ua/2024-09-14, ua-football.com/2024-09-15) have nothing to do with the league (UPL) in which Pshenychnyuk plays, and imho they are not something like WP:ROUTINE coverage. Web-wiki-warrior (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Ukraine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I've reviewed the new sources and none of them show significant coverage. Sport.ua confirms that he scored his first goal and that he is a midfielder but the rest is pure Q&A with no independent analysis. UA-Football confirms his age and number of appearances and then copies and pastes the same Q&A from the previous source, so is also not sufficient. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the most important thing about a source according to WP:SIGCOV is not evidence of notability, but rather sufficient and significant coverage on the topic. Imho the source provides it. Web-wiki-warrior (talk) 08:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The source provides information about the importance of the goal scored by the player. In addition, there is information about the player's technical skills that he used to score. The article also provides statistical information about the player. The importance of the victory the team acquired through the player's goal is also mentioned. In my opinion the source presents a compact but good analysis that can be considered as significant coverage. Adding the other two sources (sport.ua/2024-09-14, ua-football.com/2024-09-15) to the source gives, in my opinion, sufficient and significant coverage here. Web-wiki-warrior (talk) 19:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sourcing deeply insufficient for GNG. Routine match reports never count towards notability, and that is definitely what the handful of sources here are. JoelleJay (talk) 23:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are other sources (for example source-1, source-2, source-3) that I think provide the GNG/WP:SIGCOV. Web-wiki-warrior (talk) 12:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – If the creator Web-wiki-warrior agree to submit this time. I see good faith in the creation of the article, but the notability of the sources still raises doubts. Svartner (talk) 00:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not necessarily questioning good faith here, as it's certainly not bad faith, but the creator's understanding of what is significant and meaningful coverage is deeply, deeply flawed, and this has been shown over several articles/AfDs now. I think submission should be an absolute minimum for any kind of draftification. Anwegmann (talk) 03:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide an example of what you think is sufficient and significant coverage when it comes to an wikipedia article about a football player. 80.149.46.228 (talk) 08:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See this example of significant coverage for Leah Williamson. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an excellent example. Thank you. Anwegmann (talk) 23:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spiderone: Thank you for example, but that doesn't lead me to think that at least following sources (source-1, source-2, source-3) don't provide WP:SIGCOV about Oleksandr Pshenychnyuk. Web-wiki-warrior (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are just passing mentions from what I can read... ಠ_ಠ ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Clara A. Djalim: Sorry, but imho you are wrong ... 1. The sources I mentioned/provided (source-1, source-2, source-3) are not passing mentions. 2. I don't think you can read Ukrainian, so in this context, I don't think you can judge 100% whether the content of the sources mentioned above provides WP:SIGCOV or not. Web-wiki-warrior (talk) 10:01, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General question: Is an interview (for example at least for 30 Minutes) with the football player that was published as a YouTube video considered as sufficient and significant coverage? Web-wiki-warrior (talk) 08:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per last AFD. I really don't see potential as a draft since almost nobody outside Ukraine knows the clubs he played for. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Clara A. Djalim: Sorry, but imho you are wrong again if we take a closer look at your sentence "almost nobody outside Ukraine knows the clubs he played for". Pshenychnyuk plays for Ukrainian Premier League side FC Chornomorets Odesa. If you don't know the team doesn't mean nobody outside Ukraine knows the club he plays for. If we take a look at Wikipedia article FC Chornomorets Odesa (it's the club Pshenychnyuk plays for), we can see that article is provided by 37 languages. Furthermore, it is not a criterion of WP:SIGCOV whether someone outside Ukraine knows/doesn't know football teams from the Ukrainian Premier League. Web-wiki-warrior (talk) 10:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge‎ to List of High School DxD characters. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rias Gremory

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

Character appears to fail standalone notability, and much of the article seems to fall under WP:FANCRUFT. The vast majority of the article is unsourced aside from primary references to episodes of the anime, and almost all the secondary references are only in the "reception" section. Almost none of these references meet WP:SIGCOV: 1 only briefly covers Highschool DxD, and is mostly about Jamie Marchi, 2 is primary, 3-23 are WP:USERG, and 24-29 are just describing merchandise, and most of them are USERG. 30 is the only reference that may be a reliable secondary source, but the article does not give significant coverage to Rias, and her cosplay is not ranked particularly high. Almost nothing about Rias appears on Google Scholar, nothing at all on JSTOR, and Google News only contains trivial mentions of Highschool DxD in general, and almost none of them are specific to Rias. The article overall reads like something from a Highschool DxD fan wiki, and Rias seems to lack any standalone notability. This article should be merged into List of High School DxD characters in a greatly abridged form. Masskito (talk)

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 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Literature, and Anime and manga. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Extremely selectively, per nom. Rias is not independently notable and the article is WP:REFBOMBed with trivial mentions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of High School DxD characters per Zxcvbnm. There is some coverage that doesn't quite break passed WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs. It's best to mention this as part of an article about a notable topic, per WP:ATD. Shooterwalker (talk) 13:56, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thushara Perera

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

Fails WP:NACADEMIC. Potentially notable, but fairly low record of achievement. scope_creep^Talk 14:33, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Engineering, Sri Lanka, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- definitely on the right track, but quite a bit TOOSOON -- h-index of 18 for this highly cited field is not yet enough. Generally 11 years out of Ph.D. is a little on the low side for making it beyond the WP:PROF standards without special awards, citations, or notice. 02:21, 17 September 2024 by User:Mscuthbert (Sig Added by scope_creep 08:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC))[reply]
Delete per nom and Mscuthbert fails WP:PROF and WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge‎ to Pieve. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of pievi

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

The contents look like a disambiguation page, yet none of these entries would be known under the name "Pieve" alone, so no disambiguation is required.

The name suggests it's a list of pievi. However, pievi were very numerous, and this list would be woefully incomplete if this is the goal. I don't think it's feasible or necessary for Wikipedia to have a list of pievi.

The descriptions refer to the present-day non-ecclesiastical administrative territorial entities named after these historic no-longer extant and non-notable ecclesiastical administrative territorial entities. A minority of the listed articles do describe the history of the related pievi, eg. Città della Pieve#History and Pieve di Cento#History. Daask (talk) 13:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Geography, and Italy. Daask (talk) 13:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment An option that I didn't consider in my proposal is a merge to Pieve in a new section "Toponyms", as I see has been done in some other language Wikipedias, eg br:Pieve#Lec'hioù. Daask (talk) 14:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Pieve as suggested above by the nominator, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Pieve per above. – sgeureka ^t•c 21:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Pieve - it seems reasonable to include the list of wiki articles there, even if it is incomplete. Walsh90210 (talk) 02:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep‎. Nomination withdrawn with no remaining delete proposals (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 23:43, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anjum Sharma

AfDs for this article:

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

~~WP:REFBOMB doesn't help matters and this draft doesn't meet WP:NACTOR. A recurring character in a film doesn't sometimes show notability.~~ Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Film, and India. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: at least 2 significant roles in notable productions so that deletion is not necessary in my opinion. Trimming of references is a cleanup issue. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What roles? It is absolutely not close to meeting WP:NACTOR since there isn't any significant coverage about this person. If you really think trimming is the problem, then do it, because I see non notability and less clean up issue. We are arguing about meeting our general notability guidelines and how the content matches with the sources. Additionally, having two significant roles isn't the problem because it's less of WP:NACTOR, which is a ~~an essay~~ guide to help us in knowing how possible can a person be notable. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an essay it's a policy guideline as it states at top of the page, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it is a guideline. As for If you really think trimming is the problem, then do it, that's asked so kindly, thank you, but I am not the one who sees an issue here. As for what the roles are, at least roles in the recurring cast in Mizapur and in the main cast of Sultan of Delhi. For the rest, the guideline is clear but I am not sure I understand what you say. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable person, yes it's need to cleanup references. Xegma(talk) 17:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a withdrawn nomination. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 23:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TikTok Dabloons

AfDs for this article:

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

In my opinion- this article survived its last deletion discussion based more on rule technicalities rather than TikTok dabloons genuinely warranting an article. The article is essentially just "A bunch of TikTok users made up and joked about a fictional currency based on a funny internet image of a cat for 1-2 months"- hardly different from a Know Your Meme article covering any other similar brief trend.

The thin argument that this article could be considered significant is carried by the fact that the NYT, Verge, Mashable and Guardian all happened to cover the Dabloons meme during its 15 minutes of fame. As time has passed, there has been no sustained coverage and this article remains a stub. I think a deletion discussion should be revived- at best merge it into list of Internet phenomena Uelly (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Coverage last time was fine. I don't see anything past 2022 [7]. The world has moved on, but it was notable a few years ago. Seems to be a fad that came and went. Oaktree b (talk) 15:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, seems to be a classic case of WP:NOTNEWS. Just because sources exist doesn't mean this a notable subject, looks like it would easily fail WP:10YT. There has been no notable coverage since 2022. Esolo5002 (talk) 18:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Flash in the pan meme that fails WP:SUSTAINED and WP:NOTNEWS. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:33, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I cannot find any reliable source outside of November 2022, which all of the sources in the article are from. Fails WP:SUSTAINED win8x (talking | spying) 21:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge‎ to V/Vm#V/Vm Test Records. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:32, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

V/Vm Test Records

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

Nominated by anon IP as: Non-notable record label, complete lack of sources and very little news coverage. Only two of the artists mentioned in the article mention V/Vm Test Records on their page, one of these artists is V/Vm himself. Violates WP:GNG. User:74.108.22.119. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and United Kingdom. UtherSRG (talk) 14:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or merge into V/Vm#V/Vm Test Records. ApexParagon (talk) 19:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into V/Vm § V/Vm Test Records, but selectively – without independent sources, statements like V/Vm Test Records were notable for their rebellious approach should be left behind. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A clear merge candidate. This didn't need to come to AfD. Chubbles (talk) 13:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Closing as keep per consensus. !votes haven't been changed hence not a speedy keep close. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kaalam Raasina Kathalu

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

Fails WP:NFILM. The film was moved to draft but recreated by another IP (likely the same person -- since it ia low budget film, WP:COI?)

The reason it was moved to draft is that all sources relate to Akash Puri releasing the film's trailer. This article shouldn't exist because the entire article is banking on the effect of Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Film#Marketing.

This source shows Akash Puri being given flowers beforing watching the film's trailer on a laptop [8]. How is any of this notable?

Regarding Bru Times, the source is obviously unreliable and a compilation of many sources. Although you may think it is a review, it says Upon its release, "Kaalam Raasina Kathalu" received critical acclaim for its storytelling, direction, and performances. Critics praised the film for its nuanced portrayal of complex human emotions and the depth of its characters.

If you want to know wheter Bru Times is reliable read another review like [9], ("has been praised", etc.) prove it is unreliable. DareshMohan (talk) 07:57, 8 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 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect to~~ List of Telugu films of 2024 -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I just added so many reliable references such as News18 India, Eenadu, NTV (India), The Hans India, Sakshi (newspaper), and Zee News. I think it also meets WP:HEY. Jorge Crew (talk) 13:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NFILM. No reception or reviews. Sources are poor and mostly on the release event and one source by Bru Times is clearly unreliable that says it is a people's platform where anyone is free to write news and become a jounalist. There is no significant coverage and reviews in reliable independent secondary source. RangersRus (talk) 15:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Nothing that shows significant coverage in reliable sources. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw - I withdraw my nomination in regards to the NTV and Sakshi success meet sources. In light of new sources, @Mushy Yank: do you stand by your vote? DareshMohan (talk) 05:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I concur that this can be a Keep. Thanks. (But, as you know, you need all users to change their !votes for this to be SpeedyKept as withdrawn.) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 14:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Praveen Singh

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

Praveen Singh does not meet the qualifications for a Wikipedia page, especially under the WP:NPOL notability guidelines. His role as a block pramukh lacks national significance and does not represent a state or province-level office in India. Note: This page is being nominated as part of an ongoing New Page Patrol (NPP) training exercise. Charlie (talk) 13:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. Charlie (talk) 13:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't meet notability criteria. --Ratekreel (talk) 14:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Clearly fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG; the sources do not provide WP:SIGCOV. Best wishes to the nominator for NPP School. GrabUp - Talk 14:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this article should be kept as Praveen Singh has been a notable political figure in Uttar Pradesh with significant contributions to regional politics, being a local i am aware he's going to contest for block elections in 2026 from Machhrehta Block. In case of India, the Panchayati Raj system still prevails and for Indians the block levels are really significant offices in government. IndianQuest (talk) 17:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IndianQuest: Let him contest and win the Block-level election; only then can the article be recreated and retained. Currently, he does not meet the notability criteria according to Wikipedia’s guidelines. GrabUp - Talk 03:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GrabUp block level elections are insignificant. He must win either national elections (to become a Member of Parliament) or state-wide legislative elections (to become a Member of the Legislative Assembly). Charlie (talk) 03:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CharlieMehta: I thought Block-level elections meant MLA elections, as every MLA is elected from blocks in a district. GrabUp - Talk 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The hierarchy is as follows: Gram Panchayat (village level), Block Panchayat (a group of Gram Panchayats at the intermediary level), and Zilla Panchayat (comprising several Block Panchayats). A constituency district typically includes at least one city municipal corporation, a few municipal councils, and several Zilla Panchayats. To represent the area, an MLA must be elected across the entire constituency. Charlie (talk) 05:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explaination😉 GrabUp - Talk 06:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes very well explained. So far he has only been contesting for block elections. IndianQuest (talk) 08:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom. Poor and unreliable sources from a personal self published youtube videos, Facebook and WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 12:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: does not meet the qualifications for a Wikipedia page, especially under the WP:NPOL notability guidelines. Youknow? (talk) 14:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per RangersRus. Even if he’s a party block (committee person), that’s not notable. I was an equivalent, county committee member, and that’s not notable. I also agree that the sourcing is not reliable. Bearian (talk) 00:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Satisfied with the last statement of article creator. (non-admin closure) Gabriel (……?) 09:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Ururuka

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

During the time he was alive no news talked about him to pass WP:GNG. Now his dead a governor has to build a Statue of him in remembrance of his works in the construction of road which is the only significant coverage. That means during the times he was alive he wasn't important to the news to be talked about which fails notability on wikipedia but his well known to the Nigerian east politicians. Aside being remembered as the late Minister of Works due to his death. Theirs nothing else to proof notability. Gabriel (……?) 13:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Nigeria. Gabriel (……?) 13:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This passes WP:NPOL. I’d advise the creator to add citations to sentences or remove them entirely. Best, Reading Beans 13:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you@Reading Beans I will review the article accordingly as per your advise. Cfaso2000 (talk) 14:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Once again @Gabriel601 has nominated my article for deletion. This is the 3rd time he is doing so in a week or so making me wonder what this is all about. Nevertheless, regarding Paul Ururuka, who was honoured with the national honour of Commander of the Federal Republic by Rt. Hon Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe, the first President of Nigeria, he is notable. You may reference some Nigerian history to get convinced. Cfaso2000 (talk) 14:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cfaso2000, not everyone conferred with CON, OON or similar titles is notable. Ururuka is notable here simple notable because he was a regional minister for works and simpler positions. Don’t create articles because they were given titles by the government. This ain’t politics. Best, Reading Beans 14:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Regional minister listed on the Regional minister article page that doesn't meet WP:GNG. The WP:NPOL state that Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. If I can repeat that again "does not guarantee notability." If not they are lot of politicians with a lot of political office work but no coverage about them. Other editors can now possibly use statement from this AFD rather than what Wikipedia says to judge their own article. Gabriel (……?) 17:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it was Engr. David Umahi I will accept that because his not only given the position of a minister of work same as Paul Ururuka but has a lot of coverage about him. My question is that where was the news when Paul Ururuka was alive. Gabriel (……?) 17:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where was the news when Paul Ururuka was alive? He died in 1970 and the internet was not invented or was not available for public consumption back then(was only for military use). You would need to subscribe to Reuters to get back issues of digitized print news about him. The same applies to all the ministers back then...although some have had continued coverage after death, but remember, "notability is not temporary". If you were notable between 1954-1970, you should be notable now. That he is being immortalized today shows he was and is still notable. He was in charge of 8 states (former Easter Region constituting the five south eastern states, then Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Cross River States) of current day Nigeria. Cfaso2000 (talk) 05:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gabriel601, please, WP:LISTEN to me when I tell you that the subject passes NPOL. The monument about him built the Abia State government is still standing at Obikabia junction. Your argument sounds like one of the arguments to avoid in a deletion discussion. Best, Reading Beans 09:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Clear pass of WP:NPOLITICIAN 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2028 Cypriot presidential election

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

Sounds like a violation of WP:NOTCRYSTAL. The election is more than 3 years from now Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Politics. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not sure if the nominator has read NOTCRYSTAL, but the first bullet point of it says "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." This is clearly a scheduled and notable event that is almost certain to take place. What has generally been regarded to be a valid reason for nominating future election articles for deletion is a lack of information specific to the election in question. However, in this case there are numerous sources for the potential candidates for this election. As a result, I don't see a valid reason to delete it. Cheers, Number 5 7 17:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Number 57. A scheduled and notable event with with reliable sourcing specific to the election. Sal2100 (talk) 16:08, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:09, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Maharashtra Premier League

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

Another domestic event with not enough coverage on independent reliable sources; Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 12:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and Maharashtra. Shellwood (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The parent article isn't notable, and by extension this isn't either. AA (talk) 12:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 14:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maharashtra Premier League

AfDs for this article:

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

Another domestic league with not enough coverage on independent reliable source; Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 12:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and Maharashtra. Shellwood (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. Virtually nothing has changed from the first AfD, so per nom. Should also be salted to deter more recreations following this AfD (provided the result is delete, of course). AA (talk) 11:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt nothing has change since I nominated this for AFD successfully last year. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kerala Cricket League

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

Not enough coverage on independent sources; Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 12:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and Kerala. Shellwood (talk) 12:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. AA (talk) 10:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Book (album). (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Super Cool (song)

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

Should be redirected to Book (album), as its only coverage is within the context of the album. The sources on the article do not establish significant independent notability for this song. Its main claim (before my removal of it) was going to number one on some chart called the "SubModern Tracks", which is published on a non-descript website but has no clear methodology or claim to significance, so would appear to be a candidate for WP:BADCHARTS. The sources are: a link to a podcast episode about the album; an interview with a band member about the album; a PopMatters review for the album; a They Might Be Giants wiki page (obviously failing WP:USERG), and one blog-news article on a site called Soundsphere that moreso focuses on the album. Ss112 11:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 18:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect article seems to be written about the album anyways. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:08, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you worked on this article Whatcha gotta say? :) -ThaFDA (talk) 15:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 14:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Next Star (Nigeria)

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

This subject needs to be assessed. Rejected twice via the talk page here. Moved to mainspace by a block user named TheChineseGroundnut for sock who has a page reviewer right. I feel the award was created to backup Johnel notability on wikipedia. Majority of the edits came from the same block user who accepted Johnel seen here. Gabriel (……?) 11:30, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards, Organizations, and Nigeria. Gabriel (……?) 11:30, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a made up in one day award for up and coming but new musical performers. Bearian (talk) 01:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Routine coverages does not meet the general notability criteria. Definitely too early. Best, Reading Beans 05:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non notable award, fails GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. It looks like the most productive way to resolve this is a discussion on the article talk page, not an AfD. No prejudice against renomination once the basics of the arguments have been worked out. asilvering (talk) 20:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of massacres of Bosniaks

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

For the most part, we don't list these based on ethnic affiliation. Essentially this is just copied from already existing articles: List of mass executions and massacres in Yugoslavia during World War II and List of massacres in the Bosnian War. Griboski (talk) 16:51, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, History, Military, Lists, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:26, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. As a regular user (directed from https://weekly.hatnote.com/archive/en/20240913/weeklypedia_20240913.html ), the article subjectively seems interesting & valuable to me). Aristotles (talk) 22:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. What do you mean we don’t list these based on ethnic affiliation for the most part? List of massacres of Turkish people? List of massacres of Armenians? List of massacres of Azerbaijanis?

As for your second point, I mean you could argue any duplicate / identical information across articles is copied? This list focuses solely on Bosniaks, so I believe it deserves its own article, as did the curation page. Nevertheless, that does not warrant for deletion an article that cites 25 RS Aliy Dawut (talk) 19:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yet there's no list for Albanians, Croats, Serbs, Macedonians, Greeks, Bulgarians, Russians, Ukrainians, and so on. My view is that we shouldn't be going down that road when most of them are already listed by conflict or country. --Griboski (talk) 20:18, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok… I understand your personal view on the matter but again I don’t think that is enough to justify deleting an article that cites multiple RS and passed Wikipedia curation standards fairly quickly. Why not try and address concerns on the talk page instead of immediately attempting to delete an entire article? Aliy Dawut (talk) 20:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly oppose the request. The fact that the theme is present in other articles doesn't warrant the deletion of an article. OP also called for deletion of Genocide of Bosniaks in World War II. Well... As an other user suggested, one could simply discuss this in the talk page instead of hastily attempting to delete it. AlexBachmann (talk) 22:47, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All articles on the line of List of massacres of X should be deleted. — Sadko (words are wind) 00:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree, we know this statement will not lead to the deletion of X articles. Maintaining my argument. AlexBachmann (talk) 01:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. That logic seems rather flawed, no offense to the above user. Aliy Dawut (talk) 01:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Most of these are not notable. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 09:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean “not notable”? And why is that reason to delete an article that cites multiple RS? Aliy Dawut (talk) 08:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these are not notable Excuse me? AlexBachmann (talk) 22:07, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have some questions: probably for Aliy Dawut 1) there are items here that are not on either of the lists covering Yugoslavia and the Bosnian War. Should they be added to those lists? (I note that in some cases the lists have used different names, so it's hard to tell what is and isn't missing, if anything.) 2) What does this list provide that the others do not? It looks to me like this is a chosen subset of those - why is this subset needed? Lamona (talk) 02:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1) Well, one of the main reasons I created this page was because I felt that the existing articles such as List of massacres in the Bosnian War and List of massacres in the Croatian War of Independence etc did not extensively cover the full scale and list of massacres and atrocities, mainly against Bosniaks, that they can and should. I feel that this article adds a greater degree of detail and context to that. 2) See my previous answer, and not only quality and detail, but in terms of sheer quantity as well Aliy Dawut (talk) 02:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could this be satisfied by edits to those lists? Lamona (talk) 16:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean possibly, but why do that when we could just leave this already existing much more detailed and complete list up and running? Aliy Dawut (talk) 19:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the point of this AfD is about redundancy: "For the most part, we don't list these based on ethnic affiliation. Essentially this is just copied from already existing articles". So it seems like a "keep" !vote needs to respond to to that. Lamona (talk) 03:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There have already been several responses to that, which was the original AFD request. Again, there are several other ethnic group related massacre articles already present and established, and although there is some material which is the same as other articles for obvious reasons, there is still much new and unique content listed here. Moreover, as I and another user pointed out, this concern doesn’t seem to warrant the immediate deletion of an entire article that cites a multitude of RS. Why not address the concerns on the talk page first instead of going right for a deletion attempt? Aliy Dawut (talk) 03:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It is not clear that there is any policy-based reason for deletion being advanced here; "we don't do X" is not such a reason. Editors should try to identify such a reason if there is one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I have not much else to add besides what I and others on the oppose side have already definitively stated. Please see my above points for opposing and feel free to ask me any further questions Aliy Dawut (talk) 11:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Justin R. Begnaud

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

Nominating for deletion as a BEFORE check does not show any significant coverage of the article subject. I am also unable to locate within any of the references used in the article, Evidence of significant coverage. Most of the article is entirely unsourced and appears to constitute original research. There is no secondary coverage available to substantiate many of the claims made. The article would have to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopaedic and I do not believe there is sufficient sourcing out there to do so. This means deletion is I believe the most appropriate option available. It is possible that some of the works this man has been a producer for our notable however notability is not inherited and he would still need to meet the criteria set out at WP:NPRODUCER, which he does not. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination, I couldn't find SIGCOV in reliable sources, either, just passing mentions in articles about films. He's reportedly on award-winning films, but on Wikipedia notability is not inherited. Two of the sources cited don't mention him. The promotional wording, unsourced claims about his early life and article creator's edit history all suggested undisclosed paid editing. If kept, the article should be moved to Justin Begnaud per WP:COMMONNAME. Wikishovel (talk) 14:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:16, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Kerala Cricket League

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

Not enough coverage on independent sources; Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 11:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Cricket, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable league which doesn't meet the wider inclusion guidelines of WP:OFFCRIC, let alone WP:GNG. AA (talk) 20:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 03:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Finvasia

AfDs for this article:

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

An article about a finance company. Previous instances were soft-deleted at AfD (January 2022) and deleted at AfD in April 2024; this instance was created by a new editor, rejected at AfC in July, then moved into main space by the article creator. The present article content lists acquisitions and licenses which fall under WP:ORGTRIV; the most substantial references are the interview pieces in Times Now and Cyprus Business News, but these are presenting a company-aspirational view. I don't see sufficient coverage to demonstrate attained notability. AllyD (talk) 08:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Punjab. AllyD (talk) 08:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Concurring with nom, and also with the previous instances of soft-deletions at AfD. Although future notability might be possible from what seems to be emerging scandals about tech breaks coming to light. GuardianH (talk) 19:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete orphan article. Sources look rather routine rather than establishing WP:CORP. LibStar (talk) 01:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Mojo Hand (talk) 13:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hoiio

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

No references here. WP:BEFORE shows limited coverage of the company. WP:GNG not met. – robertsky (talk) 10:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 10:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Vietnam. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there is Straits Times but I don't think that it's enough for WP:NCORP Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree that the Straits times article is significant coverage, but it's only one article and I found very little else let alone lengthy coverage.
Article was significantly cut back in 2020 on the grounds of promotional content, but that also took out a lot of content and links. Anyone interested in arguing for keep might want to explore the diff. Of the removed links I found these two interesting but ultimately not sufficiently independent:

Oblivy (talk) 14:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. I'd normally prefer to weight the WP:ATD argument more heavily, but a) there's barely anything to this article, and b) this makes it easier to deal with vexatious recreations via G4. Future editors who believe they've found more sources are advised to publish through WP:AFC. Thank you. asilvering (talk) 20:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Border 2 (2026 film)

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

Film has not received enough significant coverage to warrant a standalone article, per WP:NFF and WP:TOOSOON. Draftify until the topic receives more coverage BOVINEBOY2008 10:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify, I agree with Bovineboy here. Put it in drafts until we can get a better picture of its notability. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 11:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Border_(1997_film)#Sequel -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draftify. Too early. The makers are still making announcements about the cast. Film is still at early stage of making and is in pre-production. There is nothing notable yet. RangersRus (talk) 12:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the previous AFD, I voted for draftify but looks like it was republished again without any notability and is way too early for any coverage on the film that will presumably (no release date) release in 2026. I stay my vote to just delete now. RangersRus (talk) 11:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This was already discussed in the previous AfD about this film, and it was draftified. We should delete this one because the draftified version is sufficient, and we should not keep creating drafts repeatedly. GrabUp - Talk 06:44, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus: You were also part of the previous discussion; maybe you forgot. GrabUp - Talk 06:46, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I should have checked the last AFD but the previous one is not listed here on this AFD about past discussions. Thank you for the link to last AFD. Delete is the only option now. RangersRus (talk) 11:17, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. The consensus leans towards a keep with an agreement that coverage bias is present. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:49, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Ikeazor

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

Contested draft, so we're here. The role has no inherent notability and sourcing found does not establish ANYBIO or the GNG Star Mississippi 20:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Nigeria. Star Mississippi 20:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe that this article should be deleted for the following reasons:

(1) The articles cited aptly profiles Philip Ikeazor amongst other appointees of the President (Ahmed Bola Tinubu) eg https://newswirengr.com/2023/09/16/meet-philip-ikeazor-a-cbn-deputy-governor-nominee-with-over-30-years-of-experience-in-the-financial-services-industry/ and (2)

(2) The Central Bank of Nigeria is a high profile organization, charged with monetary policy and regulating financial services (like the Bank of England and the US Treasury). It's clout, and pedigree is not in doubt. Being appointed Deputy Governor of this bank is quite a high-profile thing, endowing you with instant notability.

(3) He was cited here by Bloomberg (https://www.bloomberg.com/profile/person/16567452?embedded-checkout=true) as a former CEO/MD of Keystone Bank(a major Deposit Money Bank in Nigeria)

HIS BIO

In this Youtube Video of the Nigerian Senate proceedings, Ikeazor read out his bio before the Senate https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsxJ6lKgEoE. This video channel wasn't Ikeazor's personal youtube channel, but Arise News (Thisday Newspaper's Television channel). His testimony before the Senate is judicially admissible anywhere as credible and under oath. The Senate confirmation was also covered by The Punch Newspapers, which I cited here https://punchng.com/breaking-senate-confirms-cardoso-cbn-gov-four-others-as-deputies/#google_vignette

Most of the bio he read out are verifiable on the following websites: (1)https://businessnews.com.ng/2013/01/31/ikeazor-appointed-keystone-bank-mdceo/ , https://blerf.org/index.php/biography/ikeazor-philip/ and here https://greenwichregistrars.com/board-of-directors/

Finally, Ikeazor has been cited and covered on major independent newspapers and I cited them eg the below link.

https://dailypost.ng/2024/06/28/cbn-mulls-policies-to-tackle-cyber-insecurity-in-nigerian-financial-sector/

I do firmly believe that notability has been established.

Thanks Cfaso2000 (talk) 21:16, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have searched for more sources of notability of the subject (please see reference No 7(Independent.ng) and added reference no 11(THISDAY Live). The two news articles in major independent newspapers, in addition to other sources already provided, support his notability, and they are from way back 2020 and 2018 before his current appointment. I will continue to build on the article and contributions to improve the article are most welcome. @Star Mississippi thanks a lot for helping to improve the article. Cfaso2000 (talk) 05:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason my rationale failed to appear. Apologies. The role is not in and of itself notable. While some roles can confer notability on the post holder, this one does not. Outside that the person has no notability as presented here. Fails WP:BIO. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just responding to the statement that "the role is not in and of itself notable". I disagree with this. The role confers notability. A Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria is a very notable role. He is nominated by the President of Nigeria and then he is screened by the Senate. That confers notability. His role is established by the Act of Parliament here in sections 6-9 https://www.cbn.gov.ng/OUT/CIRCULARS/CSD/2007/CBN ACT 2007.PDF . He is a member of the Board of the Central Bank of Nigeria(https://www.cbn.gov.ng/AboutCBN/Thelist.asp), a Member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank, and add to this his executive roles as Deputy Governor, Financial System Stability (he regulates the entire banks and microfinance banks, payments service banks, and digital financial services). Thanks a lot for taking the time to contribute your views and sincerely, I appreciate it. I do hope that we can retain this article as it contributes to the stock of knowledge here. Most regards Cfaso2000 (talk) 14:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nomination --- ᗩvírαm7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє) 05:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have worked up the article significantly; it reads much better and with many independent sources coverage of the subject. It's more encyclopedic as currently framed, I believe. Thank you. Cfaso2000 (talk) 07:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I have analysed all the references. None of these, none, verifies notability. There are PR pieces, press releases, passing mentions, and churnalism, coupled with interviews of the subject. The basic tenet of WP:V is not met. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The references clearly support and establish his track record in the industry. His role as Deputy Governor of the Central Bank, and a member of the Board of the Bank, and a Member of the Monetary Policy Committee as outlined in the Enabling Act of Parliament (sections 6-9) https://www.cbn.gov.ng/OUT/CIRCULARS/CSD/2007/CBN ACT 2007.PDF clearly confer notability. Pardon me for sharing the link to the Act of Parliament here again. This link to the Central Bank's website also show his notability, endowed by his role clearly https://www.cbn.gov.ng/AboutCBN/Thelist.asp

Thank you for taking the time to go through and contribute to this article. I am very appreciative.

Kind regards Cfaso2000 (talk) 14:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being the Governor of CBN would make you automatically notable but deputies (because there are a lot of deputies) would not make you notable. You are quoting the act of parliament as though we use it here, news flash, we don’t. We use the general notability guidelines to determine notability (see WP:GNG). I would look at this article once more (as I had draftified it earlier) and make a source assessment. Best, Reading Beans 05:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are only four deputies as shown here https://www.cbn.gov.ng/AboutCBN/Thelist.asp, who are all appointed by the president and with their roles stipulated by the Act of Parliament. We may not use the Acts of Parliament here, but they are sources as well, especially for occasions like this when we debate notability. Thank You. Cfaso2000 (talk) 05:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as per Cfaso2000 I think there are enough citations to meet notability.Sargdub (talk) 22:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as subject satisfies notability guidelines based on citations/sources available Cfaso2000 (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop double voting please @Cfaso2000. you've already weighed in above. Star Mississippi 21:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Star Mississippi, although the editor has discussed this article a lot, at this moment I can't see that they have cast a vote yet so I have bolded it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Above they said, I do not believe that this article should be deleted for the following reasons: which to me is a keep regardless of bolding. I did not remove any bolding in their second comment here. But I don't contest your bolding @Liz Star Mississippi 02:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Because Elected and appointed political figures at the national cabinet level are generally regarded as notable, this subject is inherently notable based on WP:NPOL. They were appointed by the President, confirmed by the parliament/senate, part of the federal cabinet (just as you’d have a deputy minister). This one is clear-cut inherent. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces, can you clarify this a bit please? I would understand your argument to apply if he'd been appointed the governor of the bank, but I read "Deputy Governor for Financial System Stability" as a "lower" role than that. Is this just an overly flowery title that means "head of the national bank"? -- asilvering (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, I eyeskipped past Cfaso2000's link to the list ([10]). This looks to me like I'd assumed - that deputy isn't the "national cabinet level". Am I wrong? -- asilvering (talk) 20:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Asilvering Allow me to do further explanation; the CBN has four Deputy Governors to support the Governor in managing the diverse functions and departments within the bank. The CBN has complex responsibilities in areas such as monetary policy, financial system stability, economic research, and corporate services, etc., and the truth remains that it'll be overly tedious for only two persons to handle (assuming we were appointing a governor and a deputy governor). The Deputy Governors are typically appointed with specific portfolios, obviously, such as Operations, Financial System Stability (where this subject falls into), Corporate Services, and Economic Policy. Having multiple deputies will only allow CBN to maintain oversight across these critical functions while ensuring that its mandate is effectively carried out. As senior officials in the central bank, they have a great impact on national economic policy, monetary policy, and financial stability. Their decisions also can affect inflation rates, interest rates, and overall economic performance in Nigeria. In fact, in the event that the Governor is absent or unable to perform duties, Deputy Governors could ensure continuity by maintaining leadership in key areas of the CBN's operations which can include representing the Governor both nationally and internationally.

There are several other things I could add but I don't want to flood this AfD with comments. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:52, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: His role in itself is notable and the citations seem sufficient to me. I also believe the article has been improved. However, Regardless, I’ll suggest further improvements as there are several grammatical/sentence errors. Asides that, I think the article passes WP:GNG and WP:POL. Mevoelo (talk) 11:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Ok, I think I'm now too involved with this to close it, so I'll add: we do have an article for Deputy Governor of the Bank of England, almost all of which have articles; we also have articles on the secondary deputy governors (deputies governor?), and the COO. I acknowledge that all of those people may also independently meet GNG, and the subject of this article may not, but I think we have WP:NPOL here, and coverage differences are more based on coverage bias than a lack of notability. -- asilvering (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to withdraw since there are extant delete !votes, and it's due to close today anyway. But I agree re: coverage bias although I'm not sure the role is N:POL relevant. Star Mississippi 21:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Shearman

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

Proposed deletion tag removed on the basis of "several sources" being present. This consists of two primary sources from the British government, an entry in the unreliable Who's Who, the subjects Twitter page and a brief mention of his appointments in a list of British diplomats. Fails WP:BASIC as lacking "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." AusLondonder (talk) 13:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bilateral relations, Uganda, and Belgium. AusLondonder (talk) 13:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 2 of the 3 provided sources are primary. Could not find significant third party coverage to meet WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 12:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 12:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Holder of the CVO, a high honour which has generally been considered notable per WP:ANYBIO. They're not handed out in cereal packets. A handful are awarded every year. Confirmation that he was appointed CVO in 2003. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ANYBIO provides a "likely" indication of notability provided sufficient in-depth secondary sources are available. As made clear, with regards to WP:ANYBIO, "meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included". ANYBIO does not exempt a subject from the sourcing test. AusLondonder (talk) 16:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also taking a look at your own chart, of the last five AfDs, just one had a clear "keep" result. AusLondonder (talk) 16:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your point is? As far as I'm concerned it's clear WP:COMMONSENSE that anyone considered notable enough by the British Government to receive a high honour (one to two hundred every year in a country of 67 million) should be considered notable enough for Wikipedia. They're not selected at random. They're selected because they're already notable. That's the point of ANYBIO #1, to catch people who are clearly notable but not widely covered in the media. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The government honouring a government official is hardly a compelling indication of notability. If he's "already notable" then sources meeting WP:BASIC would be easily locatable. He's not a historic figure. AusLondonder (talk) 14:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually (my mistake in this instance), the government didn't. The Royal Victorian Order is in the gift of the sovereign, not the government. The vast majority of government officials do not receive high honours; only a small minority. So yes, it's still a good indication of notability. If he's "already notable" then sources meeting WP:BASIC would be easily locatable. I'm sure you're very well aware that that's not really the case. The media generally has little interest in diplomats. Once again, that's largely the point of ANYBIO #1. It balances out people who are notable in real if not especially sexy jobs against media obsession with pop cultural figures. If clauses like this didn't exist then Wikipedia would become ever more focused on pop culture and even less on being a proper encyclopaedia. It's heading in that direction now, sadly, and nominations like this just speed up the rot. He's not a historic figure is a meaningless statement, especially given he's still alive. What does that mean? I assume it simply means you don't think he's notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I mean he's not a historic figure for whom it is difficult to locate sources. It is quite common for British diplomats to receive honours. I don't think it gives them all a free pass from WP:BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 15:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, only a small minority of diplomats receive high honours (i.e. CBE and above), especially in the modern day. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I decided to have a look at some British ambassadors to see whether this is accurate. Surprise, surprise, it wasn't. Menna Rawlings, ambassador to France, DCMG CVO. Karen Pierce, ambassador to the US, DCMG. Nigel Casey, ambassador to Russia, CMG MVO. Julia Longbottom, ambassador to Japan, CMG. Jill Gallard, ambassador to Germany, CMG CVO. Martin Harris, ambassador to Ukraine, OBE CMG. Alex Ellis, ambassador to Spain, KCMG. Notice a peculiar pattern here? A walled garden of articles, some with zero secondary sources (completely unacceptable for a BLP), of British diplomats awarded honours by their employer. AusLondonder (talk) 13:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:56, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. 1) The consensus has been that being posted in several places as ambassador is notable; in his case, three. 2) The CVO doesn’t confer automatic notability, but is evidence therefor. ~~3) He was the British ambassador to Belgium, a longtime ally.~~ 4) The sources are not all great, but they don’t have to be - significant coverage is all that we require - and AfD is not the place to fix articles. Bearian (talk) 00:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"consensus has been that being posted in several places as ambassador is notable; in his case, three" Absolutely not true. You're inventing notability criteria. LibStar (talk) 08:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearian: Hi there's absolutely no policy or guideline or indeed consensus stating that ambassadors are inherently notable. There are thousands in the world. A select few are notable based on secondary source coverage. As you say the sources certainly aren't great. Three primary sources, an unreliable source and a Twitter profile? That's a violation of WP:PRIMARY and unacceptable for a BLP. AusLondonder (talk) 13:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the above new information, I’ve decided to delete some parts of my prior comments, and I’m now a weak delete. I was of the idea that holding multiple (three?) posts as a full ambassador was sufficient to pass NPOL, but I guess the consensus wasn’t that clear. Bearian (talk) 15:54, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Total absence of GNG coverage. I don't see how CVO is nearly prestigious enough for ANYBIO, and anyway the subject still needs to be demonstrably notable via sourcing. JoelleJay (talk) 01:53, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ci Sha

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

~~No indication of notability per WP:NACTOR.~~ Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Entertainment, and China. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources to establish notability. The content does not provide enough verifiable information. --Loewstisch (talk) 09:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Hong, Minghua 洪铭铧 (2024-06-25). "娱乐吃瓜：最像郭靖的郭靖此沙幸运背后的压力与艰辛" [Entertainment: The pressure and hardship behind the luck of Guo Jing, who is most like Guo Jing]. Lianhe Zaobao (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-09-09. Retrieved 2024-09-09.
  The article notes: "27岁的此沙是彝族，本名诺苏木古惹古吉乌此沙，出生于四川省凉山彝族自治州。金庸小说给他侠义感，能从故事中感受到人物的重情重义，..."
  From Google Translate: "The 27-year-old Cisha is of the Yi ethnic group. His real name is Nuosumuguregujiwu Cisha. He was born in Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province. Jin Yong's novels give him a sense of chivalry, and he can feel the characters' loyalty and righteousness from the stories. ..."
2. Fu, Yuanyuan 傅圆媛 (2024-07-05). "此沙：从杨戬到郭靖，因为起步晚才更努力追赶" [This Sand: From Yang Jian to Guo Jing, because they started late, they worked harder to catch up]. Southern Metropolis Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-09-09. Retrieved 2024-09-09 – via Sohu.
  The article notes: "一轮轮的试戏，此沙至今记忆犹新，其中不乏与黄蓉、杨康的对手戏考验，以至于很多戏份到了正式拍摄时，此沙早已滚瓜烂熟，熟记于心。最终，历经层层筛选，此沙如愿以偿来到了横店，加入了《金庸武侠世界》这一梦寐以求的剧组。"
  From Google Translate: "Cisha still remembers the rounds of auditions, including the rivalry with Huang Rong and Yang Kang, so that when the official shooting came, Cisha had already memorized many scenes by heart. Finally, after layers of screening, Cisha came to Hengdian as he wished and joined the long-awaited crew of "Jin Yong's Martial Arts World"."
  The article notes: "在去年夏天因《封神》被大众熟识后，此沙过往追梦演艺圈的励志经历在网络上被高频提及，这当中有跑龙套的种种辛酸，也有抗拒诱惑对表演的坚持，“不给自己留退路”的此沙最终凭借自身的锲而不舍敲开了演员道路的大门，从大凉山到北京，再至更远的前方，一路上的经历，都被此沙视为“宝贵的财富”。"
  From Google Translate: "After becoming well-known to the public for "Fengshen" last summer, Cisha's inspirational experience of pursuing his dream of the entertainment industry was frequently mentioned on the Internet. Among them, there were all kinds of bitterness of being a supporting actor, as well as the persistence of resisting temptation and acting. Cisha, who "did not leave a way out for himself", finally opened the door to the road of an actor with his own perseverance. From Daliangshan to Beijing, and then to the farther front, the experiences along the way were regarded by Cisha as "precious wealth"."
3. Huang, Yuhan 黄钰涵 (2020-05-08). "电影《封神三部曲》杨戬造型曝光演员此沙减重20斤" [The styling of Yang Jian in the movie "The Conferred Gods Trilogy" is revealed. Actor Ci Sha lost 20 pounds] (in Chinese). China News Service. Archived from the original on 2024-09-09. Retrieved 2024-09-09.
  The article notes: "据悉，饰演杨戬的此沙，在《封神三部曲》演员训练营初期是按照质子旅的角色进行了增肌增重等各种训练，并专注于使用弓箭、刀等质子旅的武器。每天的训练时长更是不少于12小时，为了呈现古代战士身材的肌肉线条，体现原始的男性美，此沙增重15斤左右。"
  From Google Translate: "It is reported that Cisha, who plays Yang Jian, carried out various trainings such as muscle gain and weight gain according to the role of the Proton Brigade in the early stage of the actor training camp of "The Conferred Gods Trilogy", and focused on using the weapons of the Proton Brigade such as bows and arrows and knives. The training time every day is no less than 12 hours. In order to show the muscle lines of the ancient warrior's body and reflect the original male beauty, Cisha gained about 15 kilograms."
4. "饰演郭靖压力大，演员此沙自曝吃速效救心丸" [Playing Guo Jing is stressful, actor Ci Sha reveals he took quick-acting heart pills]. Red Star News [zh] (in Chinese). 2024-06-20. Archived from the original on 2024-09-09. Retrieved 2024-09-09. [zh]&rft.atitle=饰演郭靖压力大，演员此沙自曝吃速效救心丸&rft.date=2024-06-20&rft_id=https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_27802460&rfr_id=info:sid/en.wikipedia.org:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 15" class="Z3988">
  The article notes: "1997年，演员此沙出生在四川的大凉山。在微博里，他发过几张自己的童年照，在西昌市的武校，在县城的民族小学，在镇上的照相馆，以及在他出生的村庄。家人对他的期望是做一个好的“长子”，继承家里的羊皮生意；武校教练希望他能留校当老师。"
  From Google Translate: "In 1997, actor Ci Sha was born in Daliang Mountain, Sichuan. On Weibo, he posted several childhood photos of himself, at the martial arts school in Xichang City, at the ethnic primary school in the county, at the photo studio in the town, and in the village where he was born. The family's expectation for him is to be a good "eldest son" and inherit the family's sheepskin business; the martial arts school coach hopes that he can stay in school as a teacher."
5. Dong, Zhao 洞照 (2024-03-16). "原创演员此沙：郭靖的精神和境界，我只学到十分之一" [Actor Ci Sha: I have only learned one tenth of Guo Jing's spirit and realm]. New Weekly [zh] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-09-09. Retrieved 2024-09-09 – via Sohu. [zh]&rft.atitle=原创演员此沙：郭靖的精神和境界，我只学到十分之一&rft.date=2024-03-16&rft.aulast=Dong&rft.aufirst=Zhao 洞照&rft_id=https://www.sohu.com/a/764636061_100024718&rfr_id=info:sid/en.wikipedia.org:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 15" class="Z3988">
  The article notes: "2022年夏秋之交，此沙结束一部作品的拍摄，从象山回到北京。机缘巧合下，他参与了单元剧《金庸武侠世界》的试戏。出品方耀客文化的创始人吕超看了此沙的试戏片段，又了解到他的成长背景以及骑马、摔跤的专长，便提出让他试演郭靖。"
  From Google Translate: "At the turn of summer and autumn in 2022, Cisha finished filming a work and returned to Beijing from Xiangshan. By chance, he participated in the audition of the unit drama "Jin Yong's Martial Arts World". Lv Chao, the founder of the producer Yaoke Culture, watched Cisha's audition clips, and learned about his growth background and expertise in horse riding and wrestling, so he proposed that he audition Guo Jing."
6. Shen, Jiequn 沈杰群 (2024-07-04). "此沙：从杨戬到郭靖，去感受表演每一程" [Ci Sha: From Yang Jian to Guo Jing, experience every step of the performance]. China Youth Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-09-09. Retrieved 2024-09-09 – via Sina Corporation.
  The article notes: "出生于四川省凉山彝族自治州的95后青年演员此沙，在过去的这一年内从银幕到荧屏，圈粉无数。"
  From Google Translate: "Ci Sha, a young actor born after 1995 in Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province, has won countless fans from the silver screen to the TV screen in the past year."
  The article notes: "在大山里出生、长大，去城里上学，然后再到北京打拼，闯荡演艺圈……此沙觉得自己这一路经历也和郭靖有几分相似，他亦从这个角色身上收获颇多，“和郭靖一起成长”，例如学习不求回报、不计较得失的处世态度。"
  From Google Translate: "Born and raised in the mountains, went to school in the city, and then worked hard in Beijing to venture into the entertainment industry... Ci Sha felt that his experience along the way was somewhat similar to that of Guo Jing. He also gained a lot from this role, "growing up with Guo Jing", such as learning the attitude of dealing with the world without seeking rewards and not caring about gains and losses."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Ci Sha (Chinese: 此沙) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per accessed sources above. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:13, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to List of ambassadors of the European Union#Switzerland. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Jones (British diplomat)

AfDs for this article:

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

Previous AfD closed as no consensus, but should have closed as delete given AfD is not a simple headcount, with strength of argument supposed to account for something. Two editors favoured deleting, and two favoured keeping (including the creator, who cited the unreliable Who's Who as a keep rationale). Source analysis in previous AfD established Jones lacks significant coverage specifically about him in multiple published secondary sources and therefore fails WP:BASIC. The current article has not been improved since last AfD and instead still consists of three sources which do not contribute to notability. Ambassadors are not inherently notable and do not get a free pass from notability requirements. AusLondonder (talk) 13:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bilateral relations, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 13:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found this which doesn't look too bad but I don't really know how it works for ambassadors. There may be more but I am unsure what exactly counts for this. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's also this. Still not done searching but there isn't nothing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This and this are good as well. This is also a bit helpful but not as much. I was able to find this from just Switzerland and I didn't even try to search for the other places. Again, not very experienced with ambassadors, but I think this is GNG now, especially with the the Le Temps source which is the Romandy's newspaper of record. So keep.

@CFA Thoughts? PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:41, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, looks good to me. Thanks for finding those. Keep. C F A 💬 17:59, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thank only Switzerland's inexplicably well digitized press. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The source above is good, but I couldn't find anything else. Ambassadors have to meet WP:NBASIC like everyone else. I wouldn't be surprised if more coverage exists ~~but I'm inclined to delete unless some is found.~~ C F A 💬 16:57, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the coverage found provides enough coverage Microplastic Consumer (talk) 03:44, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These sources are more about EU/Swiss relations than about Jones as an individual. AusLondonder (talk) 13:08, 18 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, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OwenX There are three keep votes and no deletes. Is that not enough consensus? PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why, has AusLondonder turned into chopped liver while I wasn't looking? Either way, I don't see any reason to hurry. Owen× ☎ 21:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Expand and maintain, just expand your trajectory and your relevance increases. Alon9393 (talk) 22:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by " just expand your trajectory and your relevance increases"? It doesn't make sense is arguing for notability. LibStar (talk) 00:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LibStar Richard Jones has notoriety, as ambassador of the EU and Great Britain, he only needs expansionism and more reliable sources. Alon9393 (talk) 13:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Needs expansionism? That doesn't make sense. LibStar (talk) 09:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve: I think enough coverage is found.Santoshsah4 (talk) 08:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of ambassadors of the European Union#Switzerland. The sources that have been found do not meet NBASIC (and as has been noted, ambassadors are not inherently notable). They are all reporting on what Jones himself has said at a various press conferences about EU policy toward Switzerland. That is not significant coverage of Jones himself. The sources cited in the article are either unreliable (Who's Who and Gulabin.com [an SPS]) or routine announcements about the ambassador being posted to Switzerland and his retirement. I have been unable to find additional sources that provide significant coverage of this diplomat. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as suggested. I’m actually leaning to a weak delete, but I’m equally inclined that he could become notable. Bearian (talk) 01:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Could become notable" is WP:CRYSTAL. LibStar (talk) 09:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm not convinced by the keep votes here. Coverage is routine, and ambassadors are not inherently notable. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 23:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of ambassadors of the European Union#Switzerland per Voorts. I agree that sourced are not sufficient here to demonstrate notability for an article, and ambassadors are not presumed to be notable. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Voorts. Repeating/covering what someone says is obviously not coverage of the person, otherwise we'd have pages on every spokesperson ever. JoelleJay (talk) 01:59, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Cardiac Centre

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

Bringing this here for discussion as it was moved out of AfC, but I don't think it meets N:ORG. The coverage is non neutral (beacon, transformative) which reads like pay to play vs. independent coverage required of ORGCRIT. Aware of systemic bias, but not sure this cardiac centre is notable. Star Mississippi 12:51, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Organizations, Companies, Medicine, and Nepal. Star Mississippi 12:51, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Problem is that about every country on the planet has a national cardiac centre, so finding things on Nepal is hard. Nothing found in Pubmed, this was about the only journal that mentions it [11]. Not enough sourcing to build an article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Oaktree b. Sir, I could find some more journal articles related to National Cardiac Centre. Please have a look.
Also, I could find that some of them are indexed in PubMed too. EEverest 8848 (talk) 04:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also....you must be well aware of the fact that in developing countries like Nepal, and for non-academic institutions, it is quite rare to have a journal indexed in PubMed. EEverest 8848 (talk) 04:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: Gorkhapatra, the government’s official newspaper, provides detailed coverage of the National Cardiac Centre’s free telemedicine service for migrant workers, making it a reliable source. 1.Additionally, a Nepali article on CPR training offers further insight into the centre's work 2.The Republica and The Kathmandu Post (not included in the references of the article) , two top independent English media outlets, also cover the subject in depth 3 4 .The Rising Nepal, an English government daily, adds further credibility with its article on a free heart camp organized by the centre 5.Overall, these sources provide notability of subject with reliable independent sources . There are also additional sources available in Nepali languages. Wikirover365 (talk) 17:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : I could find that The article is supported by reliable independent sources from different reputable English as well as Nepali media, which offer substantial coverage of the subject. I have listed few of them here :

1. https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/news/national-cardiac-centre-launches-affordable-cardiovascular-risk-assessment-service-to-benefit-low-income-families/ 2.https://www.nepalhealthpress.com/noncommunicable-diseases/7173/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2JoWE0u47fWvjDOS_NCaQUH9cRpRboxQ4nBWIApaKRDKpm5MGwlcG_Iuw_aem_Ks8go2xuvaxrKVrNTKrgLg 3. https://www.healthaawaj.com/news/50528/ --Santoshsah4 (talk) 08:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No in-depth coverage. All references are advertisement in the form of press releases. nirmal (talk) 02:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nirmaljoshi I respectfully disagree with the assertion that all references in the article are merely press releases. Sources such as the government national daily Gorkhapatra and My Republica offer independent coverage of the center's activities. Additionally, other cited articles provide in-depth analysis of the center's health promotion initiatives. Reputable English-language media outlets, including The Kathmandu Post and Republica, have reported on recent developments through genuine reporting rather than relying solely on press releases.
EEverest 8848 (talk) 09:24, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I disagree. Please refer to Wikipedia:ORG.

The piece in Gorkhapatra is about Tele-medicine. It is not about this organization.

The mention in My Republica is also about theTele-medicine.

The kathmandu post explitly mentions it is a press release. "...The NCC said in a statement that this initiative, launched in conjunction with World Heart Day 2024, ....''

Best! nirmal (talk) 00:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- At best, it can be redirected to List of hospitals in Nepal.nirmal (talk) 00:36, 18 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. The sources mentioned above fail these criteria as follows:

This in MyRepublica is a company announcement, fails WP:ORGIND
This in Nepal Health Press is another company announcement, also fails ORGIND
This from Nepal Health Press appears to be a report on what happened at the NCC on World Health Day including presentations by cardiologists. It doesn't provide any in-depth information on the NCC, fails CORPDEPTH.
This from gorkhapatraonline tells the story of an anonymous person who developed symptoms of heart disease and eventually contacted the NCC. It is clearly a promotional piece to raise awareness. Fails CORPDEPTH and ORGIND.
This next in MyRepublica is another story of an anonymous person's treatment at the NCC and is also, clearly, a promotional piece to raise awareness, also fails CORPDEPTH and ORGIND.
This next in Nepal Health Press is another "awareness" promotional piece showcasing the free diagnosis and advice provided in rural communities. Fails CORPDEPTH and ORGIND.
This in HealthPati also forms part of the promotional activities of the company, informing people on what to due if someone collapses due to a heart attack. Fails CORPDEPTH and ORGIND.

WP is not a platform for promotion or advocating on subjects no matter how worthy. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. HighKing 11:54, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 00:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amit Ulman

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

Not yet ready for mainspace as it doesn't meet WP:NACTOR, WP:ANYBIO and WP:MUSICBIO. May have been covered in his native language which I also checked, yet couldn't find any WP:SIGCOV also in English language. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Bands and musicians, and Israel. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for several reasons:

(WP:NACTOR) The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. - At least in Israel it was defined as an innovative film in that the entire script is one long song, with almost all the dialogue written in rhymes and accompanied by musical instruments. ^[1]
WP:MUSICBIO Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart. - (If I understand correctly), one of his songs won tenth place in one of the Hebrew song charts in 2016.^[2]
WP:MUSICBIO Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. - One of the leading rappers in Israel, certainly in the field of Poetry slam (he founded Poetry slam Israel).^[3]
WP:MUSICBIO Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, such as a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album. - Appeared and created the movie "This City"', appeared in "Plaot" (2013), "HaMora LeAnglit" (2019) and also appeared in the series "HaHanut SheYesh Ba Hakol" (2020-2021)^[4].

There is more, but I think this is enough. Eladkarmel (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

That's fine, but you still need sources that talk about the person. We don't have these. Oaktree b (talk) 23:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Hardly any sources that talk about this person. This was all I could find [12]. Just not enough for an article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - or possible redirect/merge to This City film which is the actual subject of the Jerusalem Post article that Oaktree b found. A BEFORE search found the same source, and a bunch of social media stuff, YouTube, Spotify, SoundCloud and other user-submitted content, a couple primary sources that don't confer notability, but nothing else. The sources above brought by the creator seem like churnalism and an unreliable source (IMDB.) I think he probably is quite talented, but that it is WP:TOOSOON for an encyclopedia entry. Maybe in a few more years... Netherzone (talk) 23:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with a redirect to the film Oaktree b (talk) 14:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although I am afraid of this article being retrieved after redirecting, I agree with redirecting to This City (film) as there is nothing to merge. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge - Hebrew article seems well-sourced, and includes coverage from Walla, Haaretz, and Mako, all significant sources for Israeli topics bonus of authority control for extra reference. Article may need to be expanded upon to prove its SIGCOV but it definitely exists if someone wants to add it, or it can be draftified and all content remaining merged. EytanMelech (talk) 22:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I went to the Hebrew Wikipedia and all I could see are citations to a non notable award and few citations to his role in the film, This City (film). What independent sources are you talking about? It should be better if you would identify them and list them here. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@EytanMelech, what content are you proposing to be merged and to which target? If you meant This City (film), I would also want to know any relevant information in the article that needs merging. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, including Haaretz, Jerusalem Post, Kan, Calcalist Whizkin (talk) 17:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 02:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mizuki Otake

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

Fails WP:BLP and WP:NBAD Stvbastian (talk) 14:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Badminton, and Japan. Stvbastian (talk) 14:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As the runner-up in the 2024 Indonesia Masters Super 100 I, she and Miyu Takahashi have finished on the podium of a BWF World Tour tournament passing WP:NBADMINTON. DCsansei (talk) 20:38, 1 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) 09:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. NBAD is subordinate to the higher requirements of NSPORT, including SPORTCRIT, which demands an IRS SIGCOV source be cited in the article. Routine event recaps don't count towards notability, and we don't have evidence of meeting SPORTCRIT through any other coverage. JoelleJay (talk) 02:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the point of having the WP:SNG guideline if they are not given some level of deference? I agree that writing this article was likely premature but the fact remains that as of September 1, 2024, she has now passes a subject-specific notability guideline. In the spirit of ignore all rules, I don't see the point of deleting an article now when the guideline states that she now meets a level where significant coverage is likely to exist (or will very soon exist). Wikipedia is not served by deleting articles for individuals for whom "appropriate sourcing likely exists" just to recreate them. DCsansei (talk) 11:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per DCsansei’s general points, but especially about “appropriate sourcing likely exists”. Absurdum4242 (talk) 06:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Malinaccier (talk) 13:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis Strum

AfDs for this article:

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

I don't think the sources here meet WP:NBASIC or WP:NM, save for a writing credit on Why Not Us, which is rather weak on its own. Consult the table of relevant sources in the article. Nothing in my WP:before search was of higher quality.

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Templeton, Tom (31 July 2005). "Introducing...Alexis Strum". The Guardian. Retrieved 2 September 2023.			little content outside of fluff and quotes	✘ No
Scott, Danni (5 October 2023). "'A mix-up over ice cream on Lorraine cost me my music career 20 years ago – but now I'm back'". The Metro. Retrieved 5 October 2023.	~	WP:METRO		✘ No
Strum, Alexis (23 July 2023). "I'm finally the pop star I dreamed of becoming – and I'm in my forties". The Independent. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	written by Strum	~		✘ No
Krieger, Candice (3 March 2011). "Alexis Strum lands a starring role at your fingertips". The Jewish Chronicle. Retrieved 2 September 2023.			Short article from when watching TV on phones was novel, with a few sentences of background on Strum at the end.	✘ No
Glanvill, Natalie (17 June 2015). "Kylie Minogue Songwriter to stage Homeland meets Loose Women play". Guardian Series. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	Mostly quotes or other stuff obviously sourced to Strum		~	✘ No
"Comic documentary about failure in development". British Comedy Guide. 15 October 2018. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	mostly quotes from Strum	~		✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Mach61 04:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Theatre, and England. Mach61 04:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Entertainment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Did a teeny bit more searching, noting small amount of coverage here. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the nomination for deletion.

Strum has co-written two songs on popular 00s albums - Come and Get it by Rachel Stevens and Still Standing by Kylie Minogue in addition to the single, Why Not Us? by Monrose.

Under Notability (music), Strum therefore qualifies under the criteria:

'Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.'

In addition, Strum is eligible for inclusion under the criteria as a performer:

'Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.'

'Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).' ('Addicted' was released by Warner Bros. major label release - https://open.spotify.com/artist/49DJil4JyZdW8Upoilkfom?si=uoQw-rvcTSOKuvGOyykJkw - her second album 'Cocoon' was also a major label recording, which was shelved and has now been released and distributed on an 'independent label with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable - https://open.spotify.com/album/7vNUTEQtnCVWel68cxx5sC?si=fMuK_Zl5Q1mgtyt1TSqOAQ and https://hmv.com/store/music/cd/cocoon)

Her listing is incomplete, but she is featured on the UK Official Charts Company website: https://www.officialcharts.com/artist/alexis-strum/

In addition, she has released two albums as a recording artist, which are widely available on all streaming platforms, with 8.3k monthly streams on Spotify.

She is also eligible for inclusion under:

'Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, such as a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).'

Go My Own Way was the theme tune to the 'network television show' Vital Signs (TV Show) in the UK, which aired on ITV, starring Tamzin Outhwaite.

She is also eligible for inclusion under:

'Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.'

The music video for Bad Haircut featured Tom Ellis and was aired on The Box and MTV Hits, and has over 100,000 views on YoUTube.

She is also eligible for inclusion under:

'Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.'

The album 'Cocoon' has received a large amount of press attention since its initial planned release in 2006:

- https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/music/alexis-strum---cocoon-mercury-1024671 - https://retropopmagazine.com/alexis-strum-cocoon-album-review/

Strum's music career has also been the feature of multiple, non-trivial, published works, as well as being mentioned in articles where she has been listed as a musical performer, worthy of note:

- https://metro.co.uk/2023/10/04/lorraine-mix-up-destroyed-alexis-strums-career-for-20-years-19596176/ - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgl7ld1glk3o - https://www.aol.com/clean-bandit-were-told-stop-233558500.html?guccounter=1 - https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pop-star-music-alexis-strum-album-b2380472.html - https://player.winamp.com/podcasts/womans-hour-podcast-e59d55dc59 - https://www.theguardian.com/music/2005/aug/23/popandrock - https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/festival-finalises-acts-for-v-line-up-12712 - https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/13337233.kylie-minogue-songwriter-stage-homeland-meets-loose-women-play/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevebritney (talk • contribs) 13:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as well as the above mentioned sources such as The Guardian and the Metro (not convinced it is completely unreliable as the discussion was not clear-cut at RSN) there is also a staff written bio at AllMusic here, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've just gone through the RSN discussion links for the Metro and Im not finding any substantial discussion directly about it so unless Im missing a discussion it seems to have been quite a leap to list it as unreliable without a proper discussion, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:17, 5 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) 09:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - In its current state, the article needs to be cleaned up so it is less reliant on unreliable/insignificant sources, but it could then be expanded with info from the sources found in the discussion above. There's enough out there in solid sources like the Guardian and the BBC to at least support a stub article, maybe with more focus on her songwriting success. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 10:36, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024–25 Iraq Stars League squads

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

This type of squad overview for a league in a specific season isn't really a thing Wikipedia does. It therefore fails WP:NOT. Geschichte (talk) 09:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, Football, and Iraq. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per consensus at a very similar AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Myanmar National League squads Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 00:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, this is overkill, does WP:NOSTATS apply to this? Govvy (talk) 14:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep will be updated constantly, more sources will be available as the league commences (clubs will announce squads etc.) as evidence of notability, although I understand that Wikipedia doesn't have such pages A1lfcIRQ (talk) 22:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per previous consensuses not to have these sort of squad articles for football seasons. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amar Abba

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

No secondary sources, unacceptable for a BLP. Per WP:PRIMARY: "do not base an entire article on primary sources" - this is particularly important for BLPs. Fails WP:BASIC as lacking "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". AusLondonder (talk) 08:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bilateral relations, and Algeria. AusLondonder (talk) 08:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Belarus, Ireland, Russia, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Entirely based on primary sources. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. LibStar (talk) 09:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources are primary, and after searching for secondary reliable sources, I found only passing mentions, which are not significant coverage. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. This fails to meet the criteria of both the WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. GrabUp - Talk 06:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deep Time

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

No WP:SIGCOV, fails WP:NBOOK, no reviews or any other info on the net DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reason, they were all released around the same time, and lack WP:SIGCOV, fail WP:NBOOK, have no reviews or any other info on the net:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Literature. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, references patently fail WP:SIGCOV, and nothing on Google Scholar, Google News, or JSTOR. A Google search only brings up listings of the book. No evidence of notability. Masskito (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom, appears to fail WP:GNG, etc. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as per above. Bondegezou (talk) 10:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. I see a consensus to Keep this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2

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

Doesn't meet WP:NFILM. There aren't significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:54, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, and India. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:55, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Keep Note that local media doesnt focus on Chhollywood, as such chhattisgarhi language films barely find any mention except youtube, which is not accepted here. But it doesnt dampen people's interest in Chhattisgarhi film. Note Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2 is the biggest and highest grossing film in last few years in Chhollywood and its theatrical run was longer than Kalki 2898. Also the 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2' wikipage is well structured and complete page created using whatever sources available. Also note it is an important film in Chhollywood that has been a trend setter for sequals. If anyone can help improve it they are welcome. Bonadart (talk) 07:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: seems to have cultural significance, at least, as first sequel in Chhattisgarhi cinema. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Chhattisgarh-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All sources are poor and unreliable on this page. The poor sources have just passing mention and interview on the film by the director. Others are unreliable sources like Instagram, imdb, sacnilk, personal blog like jayjohar.com. No significant coverage and no reception and reviews in independent secondary sources. Fails WP:NFILM and WP:SIGCOV. RangersRus (talk) 16:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus please mote that local media doesnt focus on Chhollywood films, as such chhattisgarhi language films barely find any mention except youtube, (not accepted here). But it doesnt dampen people's interest in Chhattisgarhi film. Note Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2 is the biggest and highest grossing film in Chhollywood in last few years/ Its theatrical run was longer than Kalki 2898 and did better business than Auron Mein Kahan Dum Tha. Also the 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2' wikipage is well structured and complete page created using whatever sources available. Also note it is an important film in Chhollywood that has been a trend setter for sequels. these are reason enough to keep their page in wikipedia. Bonadart (talk) 11:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can not go with word of mouth. We need reliable secondary independent sources with significant coverage to consider the page's notability and so far I have found nothing significant. Its important that we follow the wikipedia guidelines for notability. RangersRus (talk) 21:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:NFIC as culturally significant as one of the most successful films in the chhattisgarhi language, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Atlantic306, nobody is doubting that the film may meets WP:NFIC. My question is, "how do we know?". Pls provide reliable sources that says it or are we now considering original researches? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 14:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not finding much at all on Google. Is there a Chhattisgarhi language search engine? regards Atlantic306 (talk) 20:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that local media doesnt focus on Chhollywood, as such chhattisgarhi language films barely find any mention but in youtube, there is lot of info but it is not accepted here. Bonadart (talk) 21:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Youtube channels that are the official channels of reliable sources such as newspapers or major magazines are acceptable. Do any of them meet that standard ? regards Atlantic306 (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

there is lot of informattion about the film in youtube, but point is, if it is accpted here Bonadart (talk) 06:41, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show us some of those sources? Here is what is said on Youtube. "Most videos on YouTube are anonymous, self-published, and unverifiable, and should not be used at all. Content uploaded from a verified official account, such as that of a news organization, may be treated as originating from the uploader and therefore inheriting their level of reliability. However, many YouTube videos from unofficial accounts are copyright violations and should not be linked from Wikipedia, according to WP:COPYLINK". If you have sources from verifiable reliable official account, please let us see. RangersRus (talk) 11:40, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi RangersRus (talk)

https://www.youtube.com/@VIDEOWORLDRAIPUR

https://www.youtube.com/@AVMGANA

https://www.youtube.com/@sundranifilms

https://www.youtube.com/@Cgliv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvgW-dBMYKE

https://www.youtube.com/@saregamaregional

https://www.youtube.com/@aarugmusicofficial

https://www.youtube.com/@sangwaritlm870

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-J2fqbib53Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iIUu_Pvyqk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdFXT0M6wrw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y9l4satlTc

the list includes some for 2000 film and some for 2024 film and is endless but best reliable are attached Bonadart (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These sources are poor to unreliable. First 3 youtube are music channels and looks like link to music videos, after that the 2 are self published youtube channels. Then 6 is again music channel and 7 too but looks self published and all the remaining clearly look like uploaded content by a unverified official accounts. Even the last source by Vistaar News has not significant coverage. There is no "lot of information" in any of the sources setting aside the problem with their reliability. RangersRus (talk) 14:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi you may consider them not reliable but lthese are the top search results, btw if reliability is bar then you have lot of reliable info on Auron Mein Kahan Dum Tha but what has happened to the film, its super flop compare it to this movie - 1st sequel, longer run than kalki 2898, biggest hit in last 5 yrs, these are reason enough as per me to keep the page Bonadart (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what you are saying. I do not know what Auron Mein Kahan Dum Tha and kalki 2898 films have to do with the YouTube videos you showed that you found in top search and yet no significant coverage in any of them. We do not want to see youtube videos with stars and interviewer mingling and having fun but need a reliable source from verifiable official account that has significant coverage. If these above were your top searches, it is clear there is not much to go with. RangersRus (talk) 14:45, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Sufficient sources mentioned for notability, A search found coverage of this films in many other languages News Sites. Monophile (talk) 8:31, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
@Monophile: Which sites? [13] DareshMohan (talk) 09:21, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are many !keep votes, but so far no reliable sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 07:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi asilvering (talk)

Note that local media doesnt focus on Chhollywood, as such chhattisgarhi language films barely find any mention in print media except youtube, which is not accepted here. But it doesnt mean people dont like these movies, infact despite that people's interest in Chhattisgarhi film has grown. Note Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2 is the biggest and highest grossing film in last few years in Chhollywood. Its theatrical run was longer than Kalki 2898 and made more monwy than Auron Mein Kahan Dum Tha. Also the 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2' wikipage is well structured and complete page created using whatever sources available. Also note it is an important film in Chhollywood that has been a trend setter for sequals being the 1st such film. All these are reasomn enough for Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2 to have a page in wikipedia. If anyone can help improve it they are welcome.

Bonadart (talk) 15:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Struck! voted twice[reply]

You were told before by another user to not vote twice and yet you did it again and repeated the same wall of texts. Please remove the second vote. RangersRus (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bonadart, it's important to remember that a subject can be popular, even very popular, and some people can think it's "important". But Wikipedia only judges articles based on notability as established by reliable secondary sources. If the sources don't exist, then, for now, there shouldn't be an article. It's not a critique of the subject, just whether or not it meets Wikipedia's standards which are unique to this project and often do not make sense to readers or infrequent editors. But, they are the basis for decision-making in AFDs. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi Read!|Liz|Read! (Read!|talk) you said unique!!! well this film Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2 is a remake or spiritual sequal to Mor Chhainha Bhuinya, a film that gave birth to an entire film industry in a state, not just that, also it gave chance to all actors to make debut, was such a blockbuster that it pushed other established Bollywood films behind. As for the remake Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 2 in 2024, note that it is the biggest film in last 5 yrs, made the max. money at BO, had a longer theatrical run than Kalki 2898, did better business than a big film like Auron Mein Kahan Dum Tha, and is the trendsetter for sequels in Chhollywood; are these not reason enough to make it unique and derserving a page in wikipedia. As for sources I have repeatedly said local media rarely profiiles Chhollywood movies but a lot of info is available in YouTube, which is not accepted here. It's not a film/ film industry fault if it is not profiled in local media. So I strongly believe this movie deserves a place in Wikipedia, and also its well-structured and well made page. Also, the film is such a big success that another sequel, Mor Chhainha Bhuinya 3 is set to release next year.Bonadart (talk) 07:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As Liz explained very clearly, Wikipedia requires notability established by reliable secondary sources. Please understand this requirement. RangersRus (talk) 13:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi RangersRus (talk) what good has notability done to Thugs of Hindustan or Auron Mein Kahan Dum Tha both are blockbuster flops. Where as this film is 1st remake, has longer theatrical run than biggest film, done better business in a state than biggest flops nationwide business, and is trensetter for sequels. These are enough reasons to keep this page, different matter that i have seen many pages without any source. Also the local media rarely profiles any Chhollywood film, so its not the film or industry's fault. I rest my case. Bonadart (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You also continue to bring up things that fall under WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It is best to stick to the reasoning THIS page should be kept without comparing it to others. Specifically, cite the reliable sources that show how this meets notability guidelines (outside of YouTube which you have already provided - all of which cannot be used to establish notability). --CNMall41 (talk) 20:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Reviewing this and the original (also up for deletion), the sources simply do not support notability. On its face, it may seem notable but sourcing must support. Even creator says "Note that local media doesnt focus on Chhollywood, as such chhattisgarhi language films barely find any mention except youtube" which sums it up. YouTube is not reliable and the media has not written about it significantly enough to meet threshold for notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
hi the local media doesnt follow or profile the Chhollywood as such media coverage isnt there except youtube (not accepted here) its neither the film or industry's fault. the significance original is huge for giving birth to san industry it even pushed other flicks behind. Raja Harishchandra and Alam Ara 2 important films, practically none review and virtually no coverage most mentions are books yet they have pages here, so why not this film you say notability, so what good has notability done for Thugs of Hindustan or Auron Mein Kahan Dum Tha both are mega flops but have pages here, a different matter there are mamy pages without 1 source here too Bonadart (talk) 19:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your want to keep this, but you stated yourself that the industry is not covered significantly in the media. Reiterating the same statement is not helpful and only leads to WALLSOFTEXT. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:DareshMohan has added sources addressing the question raised by the nominator during this discussion imv. Also, this film being a sequel, a redirect should be considered if notability is challenged. Thanks.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Three sources were added recently and unfortunately after analyzing them, they all are found to be unreliable.
- Source Vedant Samachar disclaimer says "Some elements of the site will contain material (news/photos/videos etc.) submitted by users. Vedanta Samachar accepts no responsibility for such material. The correspondent/reporter will be solely responsible for such material published in Vedanta Samachar; Vedanta Samachar or its owners, printer, publisher, editor will have no responsibility for it."
- Source Kelo Pravah is a BLOG and gets its contribution from the users as it's a citizens journalism. It says "If you come across any important incident, accident, corruption, motivational story, story, social issue or any other matter around you, please share it with us. We assure complete protection of your privacy. Your contribution will enable us to provide better and meaningful news."
- Source TheRuralPress says "The opinions and views expressed in articles, blogs, comments, or other content on TheRuralPress.in are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of S S B Media House." "While we strive to ensure that the information on this Website is accurate and up-to-date, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability with respect to the Website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the Website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk."

User:DareshMohan you are well aware of the WP:ICTFSOURCES talk page and recommend you to initiate the reliability concerns of the sources on the talk page for concensus before adding them on the page. RangersRus (talk) 19:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I added the above sources since that's what I could find. Since I wasn't sure about notability, I didn't vote here. Although there are reliability concerns, those sources should have some edge over database sources #1-2, 8-9 and 10-13. 13 is very questionable to say the least. If you are keen to know my vote, it can be considered as weak delete (not opposed to redirect). DareshMohan (talk) 21:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure standard disclaimers on news websites are enough to discard any source as ’unreliable”, but that’s just me. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, it depends. When the Terms are absent of any claims about being accurate that to me is a red flag. For example, TheRuralPress at least states they strive for accuracy which means they would need likely need prove that if came to lawsuit (i.e. they make corrections, retract, etc.). Unfortunately, my anit-virus software gives me a security warning for TheRuralPress, which has nothing to do with reliability but I will not assess it myself. The Hindu simply states it is up the reader to evaluate their accuracy. However, they explicitly disclaim accuracy for opinions, third parties, etc. which is typical (same for NYT). It is not typical to state the reporters are responsible. That's crazy and strongly indicates they have no staff journalists and no editorial oversight. S0091 (talk) 18:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. I see a consensus now to Keep this article. Thanks for continuing this discussion through its relisting. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:09, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mor Chhainha Bhuinya

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

A non notable films that doesn't meet WP:NFILM. No existence of WP:SIGCOV, and likewise, the remake. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:59, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, and India. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 23:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete, not seeing its notability. Sources are not RS. Ednabrenze (talk) 02:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Struck out my vote/comment based on the analysis by other editors who have more knowlege about the history of the film and the latest sources presented by S0091. Ednabrenze (talk) 16:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi,

Keep kindly understand that 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' was 1st film to be made in local chhattisgarhi language in over 30 yrs. so no one believed in this movie to have successful run, as such there was virtually any coverage. but after its release thanks to word of mouth publicity the film became a blockbuster leaving behind 'Mohabatein' and 'Mission Kashmir' in the state. Today this film has acquired a cult status as it gave birth to Chhollywood, an entirely new film industry in the state. Remember 'Andaz Apna Apna' despite huge star cast the film was declared massive flop but today it has gained a cult status. As such wiki page on 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' too deserves a page in wikipedia. Whatever sources that have been added are the only sources available online besides youtube (which is not accepted here). Most importanly this page is the most complete and well prepared page on this movie unlike previous attempts. As such 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' wikipedia page should be kept. If anyone can help improve it they are welcome. Bonadart (talk) 07:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi, Ednabrenze kindly understand that 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' was 1st film to be made in local chhattisgarhi language in over 30 yrs. so no one believed in this movie to have successful run, as such there was virtually any coverage. but after its release thanks to word of mouth publicity the film became a blockbuster leaving behind 'Mohabatein' and 'Mission Kashmir' in the state. Today this film has acquired a cult status as it gave birth to Chhollywood, an entirely new film industry in the state. Note that local media doesnt focus on Chhollywood, as such chhattisgarhi language films barely find mention. Remember 'Andaz Apna Apna', a wiki page on 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' too deserves a page in wikipedia. youtube has lot of info, but not accepted here. Most importantly this page is the most complete and well prepared page on this movie unlike previous attempts. If anyone can help improve it they are welcome. Bonadart (talk) 07:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry but you cannot !vote twice. Kindly remove one of your two "Keep"s in bold, please -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi actually i was giving a reply i will correct it Bonadart (talk) 09:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: and improve; seems to be a commercially important film in Chhattisgarhi cinema. A redirect might be considered, if the sequel is not redirected too. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Chhattisgarh-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the analysis but keeping an article here solely depends on the number of reliable sources that could be used to verify claims made in the article. I am not from that state and I would not know the historical background of the film but if there had been enough RS sources I would not have supported deletion. Ednabrenze (talk) 03:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

solely depends on the number of reliable sources, yes and no, it also depends on what they say and if one reliable source proves the film is important in the local culture that can be considered a sufficient reason to keep the page. At least, that is my understanding. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Only one source by Rediff that has some coverage and all other sources are poor and unreliable with director's recognition and announcement on the news of the sequel. I would also opt for Redirect but I am not sure where to redirect this page to. Fails WP:NFILM and WP:SIGCOV. RangersRus (talk) 16:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus kindly understand that 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' was 1st film to be made in local chhattisgarhi language in over 30 yrs. so no one believed in this movie to have successful run, as such there was virtually any coverage. but after its release thanks to word of mouth publicity the film became a blockbuster beating 'Mohabatein' and 'Mission Kashmir' released same day in the state. Today this film has acquired a cult status as it single handly gave birth to Chhollywood, an entirely new film industry in the state (very few films can be credited for that anywhere in india), just this is strong reason to keep the page i think. Remember 'Andaz Apna Apna' despite huge star cast the film was declared massive flop but today it has gained a cult status. As such page on 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' too deserves a page in wikipedia. Whatever sources that have been added are the only sources available online besides youtube (not accepted here). Most importanly this page is the most complete and well prepared page on this movie unlike previous attempts. As such 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' wikipedia page should be kept. Bonadart (talk) 11:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We need reliable secondary independent sources with significant coverage to consider the page's notability and so far I have found nothing significant. Its important that we follow the wikipedia guidelines for notability. RangersRus (talk) 00:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
there is lot of informattion about the film in youtube, but point is, if it is accpted here Bonadart (talk) 06:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:NFIC as culturally significant as one of the major hit films in the chhattisgarhi language. imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Since I am from Chhattisgarh I know how important this film is in reviving Chhattisgarhi film industry after 30 years. This film gave us a great director Satish Jain who has previously been a writer of big Hindi films and actor Anuj Sharma who is a Padmashri award winner and MLA and gave many great actors and this film has also been dubbed and remade in other languages. Before creating this article I originally tried to create it from a draft article but the draft kept getting rejected. This article is an important part of the history of Chhattisgarhi culture. I know there are not too many reliable sources on the internet but this film is remembered by the people of Chhattisgarh. Tushar (talk) 18:28, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
hi Tushar3011 (talk) thanks for acknowleding the importance of the film, if you can help improve the article with more info its better. Bonadart (talk) 20:01, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep !voters are arguing that the film is very important, but are there any sources we can use for this?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 07:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi, asilvering (talk)

i will again say it, bcoz kindly understand that 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' was 1st film to be made in local chhattisgarhi language in over 30 yrs. This film single-handedly gave birth to a new film industry in the state, all actors made debut with this film. Note that no one believed in this movie to have successful run when it was being made, as such there was virtually any coverage. till this date the local media rarely follows the Chhollywood. This despitre fact that films made here are of better quality and value than bhojpuri films known for crass dialogues and provocative song/dance (as per me). Its history that after its release thanks to word of mouth publicity the film became a blockbuster leaving behind 'Mohabatein' and 'Mission Kashmir' in the state. As such with no media coverage Chhollywood doesnt get mention in media, despite that people love these films. Today this film has acquired a cult status. Remember 'Andaz Apna Apna' despite huge star cast the film was declared massive flop but today it has gained a cult status. As such wiki page on 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' too deserves a place in wikipedia. Whatever sources that have been added are the only sources available online besides youtube (which is not accepted here). Most importantly this page is the most complete and well prepared page on this movie unlike previous attempts. As such 'Mor Chhainha Bhuinya' wikipedia page should be kept. If anyone can help improve it they are welcome.

Bonadart (talk) 15:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Struck! Voted twice[reply]

You were told before by another user to not vote twice and yet you did it again and repeated the same wall of texts. Please remove the second vote. RangersRus (talk) 16:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page has some sources....including a review by Komal Nahta. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a review by Komal Nahta in rediff source but some coverage with interview of the filmmaker. I already said about this in my vote and all other sources are poor and unreliable. RangersRus (talk) 11:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not technically a "review", but it IS significant coverage by a notable film critic and it certainly can be used on the page. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(And I can't locate your mentioning of Komal Nahta in your !vote, for the record) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't Rediff enough? RangersRus (talk) 12:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on what you want to do of it. If you say you already mentioned "this" and I mention the name of the critic and you don't, no, it is not and it is therefore inaccurate to say you "already said about this". -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why it matters whether the name of the source Rediff or the critic who wrote an article in it is mentioned? Nothing inaccurate here. RangersRus (talk) 13:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, please! You say you have said something and you haven't. That's all. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it is already on the page but not independent of the filmmakers self claimed coverage. RangersRus (talk) 12:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can be attributed to Komal Nahta:

The story behind the making and release of Mor Chhainha Bhuinya, which has celebrated a 100 day run in Chhattisgarh, is such dramatic fare that it could easily pass off as a good subject for a hit film! Satish Jain, its writer-producer-director, is not new to the Hindi film world.

The worst came when Govinda and director Manoj Agarwal found his Hadh Kar Di Aapne screenplay unsuitable and replaced him, keeping only his story. Dejected, Satish returned to his hometown, Raipur in Chhattisgarh, with the subject for a Chhattisgarhi film in his mind, a little money in his pocket and a lot of tension.Making a Chhattisgarhi film was not easy, especially because until then, only two films had been produced in that dialect.Besides, there was no finance available for the film.

The film was mainly shot in Bhilai, besides other places. Once the film's shooting was completed, Satish thought his woes were over.But it had only just begun. No distributor was ready to touch the film. Depressed, but not daunted, Satish and his brother decided to distribute the film themselves.Without any knowledge of distribution, this was only the beginning of a further harrowing experience for the Jain brothers.Exhibitors were anything but co-operative. Some of those scoffed at the idea of screening a Chhattisgarhi film. But Satish and his brother used all their persuasive powers and released the film in Raipur, Durg and Bilaspur on Diwali (October 27).The rest, as they say, is history...The film, which opened with 3 prints, has 12 prints engaged today, 100 days later. The film completed a hundred day run on February 3 in Raipur, Durg and Bilaspur. Of these, cinemas in Raipur and Bilaspur had five shows daily -- an unprecedented record! In Durg too, the film was screened five shows daily for several weeks before it was brought down to four shows.The blockbuster, which cost less than Rs 15 lakhs to make, is expected to do a business of over Rs 2 crores. It is now heading for a hundred day run at Bhilai, Rajnandgaon, Korba, Dhamtari, Ambikapur and Shakti.At Rajim, which has a population of 25,000 and only two cinemas, the film is being screened at both cinemas! State transport buses are doing such brisk business, carrying loads of people to and fro the cinemas screening the hit that new bus-stops have sprung up outside such cinemas at Rajim and other smaller centres.In fact, people not only come in busloads, but in bullock carts and tractors too! So cinemas halls now display sign boards indicating parking space for the tractors and carts!In Bhilai, a British lady, running an institute where she teaches students to make video and documentary films, saw the film 70 times! She was so impressed by the film's message that the education system is not suitable for preparing the youth for jobs, that she even telephoned Satish to congratulate him. The film is about a family returning to their village after facing tough times in the impersonal city where they had gone with hope and dreams.The film's success means that about 25 Chhattisgarhi projects are in various stages of planning and production. Of these, five are in advanced stages of production or post-production.(...)But the film's collections picked up from the third day, and the collections have been rising since.The film, which looked too insignificant to merit a mention in front of the other two Diwali releases -- Mohabbatein and Mission Kashmir -- soon left the Bollywood flicks far behind in Chhattisgarh.Satish now plans to add a song to the film. This song, which already appears on the film's audio cassette, has the names of all the railway stations in Chhattisgarh and may well lure audiences all over again!The song is scheduled to be shot this month and will be included in all the prints from March. Satish is also contemplating dubbing the film in Bhojpuri.

I hate to make those long quotes. But do we have a choice? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I mention it can be used, although it is on the page, because asilvering's question is "are there any sources we can use for this"? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But you omitted the claims/interview of the filmmaker from the same source that it uses for coverage and like I said earlier, it makes the article not indepedent of the claims made by the filmmaker. In the same source, the filmmaker says

Recalls Satish, "We sold our family land at Rana Pratappur, near Bastar. My brother-in-law also mortgaged his land, while my brother borrowed money from his friends. But we still ran short of money. So my father literally begged for funds, knocking door-to-door in our village. My entire family supported me in my time of need. "If the film has a running time of only one hour 50 minutes, it is because we decided to do away with the shooting of 20 scenes and a song as we had no money left."..."The film had a very slow start. In fact, for the first two days, I felt it wouldn't work. The worst fears overtook me. I would not have had the courage to face my family after what they had done for me. I thought I may have to run away..." Satish recalls.

RangersRus (talk) 14:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only source like i said couple of times before that we can consider some coverage but it is not independent of the filmmaker himself and per notability we need 2 or more secondary independent reliable source with indepth coverage and that can not be found on the page. RangersRus (talk) 14:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't OMIT it!!!! I left it out of the quotation on purpose, to cite only what can be attributed to the critic. Your quoting it here is almost bizarre....We needed a reliable source showing the cultural significance of the film. Here you are. I'm leaving it at that. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi Mushy Yank (talk) thanks for this detailed response. I have tried to reason that its unfortunate that local media doesnt focus much on Chhollywood unlike telugu, tamil, bhojpuri, bangla, kannada, or malyalam movies. But some want to ignore the cultural significance and importance of the film that gave birth to an entirely new film industry. Hope this clarifies their doubts, once n for all. Bonadart (talk) 15:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I found this source ([14] - not sure about reliability) that says that this film revived the industry after 30 years and that the Indian state of Chhattisgarh was created 3 days after the release of this film. That in of itself sounds very significant. The Hindi name is मोर छैंहा भुइंया. DareshMohan (talk) 17:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DareshMohan: that source is unreliable personal BLOG of a user and with Gmail contact and says that it does not make any warranties about the completeness, reliability and accuracy of information. I saw this source before when trying to find a secondary independent reliable source but because of its unreliability, ignored it. RangersRus (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source comes from a blog that was only created this year. A WHOIS search shows it is about eight months old. That with other factors show it is absolutely unreliable. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Only source which could possibly be used to support notability would be this from Rediff.com. Although that is up for debate above. Assuming it is acceptable, that only leaves one reliable source that has significant coverage. I do understand the desire to want to keep this, but the sources simply do not support notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
hi the local media doesnt follow or profile the Chhollywood as such media coverage isnt there except youtube (not accepted here) its neither the film or industry's fault. the significance is huge for giving birth to san industry. Raja Harishchandra and Alam Ara 2 important films, practically none review and virtually no coverage most mentions are books yet they have pages here, so why not this film Bonadart (talk) 19:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is the fourth time you have stated such. It does not help your case as it is actually admitting that there is no significant coverage. The sources is what shows notability. Without them, the topic is not notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:09, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

so does it change facts, i say NO it doesnt, if Raja Harishchandra and Alam Ara casn have pages why not this film Bonadart (talk) 06:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I found a TOI article used in Chhattisgarhi cinema published in 2010 and coverage in this book published in 2019, both a decade of more after this film's release, about the history of Chhattisgarhi cinema which talks about the significance of the film. The TOI article is not a promo piece like we often see in TOI. Between these and Rediff, I believe the film meets WP:GNG and demonstrates the historical significance of the film. S0091 (talk) 15:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC) S0091 (talk) 15:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @DareshMohan, @CNMall41, @Ednabrenze and @RangersRus for their consideration. S0091 (talk) 16:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pinging me. I will now withdraw my vote. Ednabrenze (talk) 16:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi S0091 (talk) thanks a lot for the vote Bonadart (talk) 17:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I missed @SafariScribe. S0091 (talk) 18:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the TOI article is reliable as it is NOT part of the run of the mill NEWSORGINDIA they have put out lately. However, unless I am missing something, it is a simply mention of the film which only verifies it existed. Verification is not notability. The book is a little better but again, very little information other than verifying it was made and what it grossed. I think these get it closer but still not over the mark. Maybe a redirect to the cinema page with a mention would be appropriate. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:59, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully @CNMall41, you and I have a different definition of a "mention". This book I also found is what I consider to be a mention that only privides verification (a Chhattisgarhi language film titled Mor Chhainha Bhuinya was released in 2000). Of course you can argue TOI is not WP:SIGCOV because we don't have a firm definition of what constitutes SIGCOV, other than it's more than a sentence, but it is certainly more than a mention (non-trivial). It is eight sentences and 139 words (not counting the quote). The article also states The movie's stunning success propelled the rise of Chhattisgarhi film industry. (not included in Daresh's snip below). According Chhattisgarhi language, there are 16.25 million speakers of the language and this is the film that launched an entire industry representing those millions of people. That's not mere existence. S0091 (talk) 16:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Passing mention? TOI says

Then in 2000, Jain returned to Raipur after parting ways with Govinda and decided to make a Chhattisgarhi film Mor Chhaihan Bhuinya (My shadow and earth). Soon enough, he realized he had to produce, direct and finance the movie himself because nobody thought a Chhattisgarhi movie would work. "We had to sell off our family land near Bastar. My brother-in-law mortgaged his land. My brother Tiku sang a few songs because we couldn't afford a playback singer," he remembers. No one else was willing, so the Jains distributed the movie themselves. Mor Chhaihan Bhuinya was released on October 27, 2000. Three days later, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee announced the creation of Chhattisgarh state. The crowds expressed their happiness by thronging the theatres. Produced at just Rs 20 lakh, the film grossed an eye-popping Rs 2.5 crore. It ran for 27 weeks in Raipur's Babulal theatre. In the two cinema halls of Razim and Nawapara qasbah, it ran 24x7.

DareshMohan (talk) 03:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we do. I would agree that the TOI is reliable, especially since it is bylined. The book is also good coverage but it is more about the filmmaker. Why I said passing mention is because it is more about the history of cinema and includes that as an example. It doesn't say anything about the film other than it was created. Genre? Review? I think agreeing to disagree is appropriate but still do not see this as enough for notability. Based on it being discussed in association with the history of cimena, it may be appropriate to include a snippet there as I sated above. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:59, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we disagree. There is no guideline that requires the genre or reviews. While reviews are one of the criteria for WP:NFILM so is #2 (historical significance) which includes Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release. We'll agree another time though as we have several times before. S0091 (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And fwiw, I highly doubt my opinion will be factored in anyway, given the other votes above. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Johnson

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

Playing 1 international match for a very small country is not a credible claim to notability anymore. I cannot find any additional sources about this guy, although there are many other Mario Johnsons spread across the English-speaking world. Geschichte (talk) 06:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Bahamas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 14:29, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arens Mateli

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT, played 30 minutes in Albania's highest league and a handful of games in Kosovo. All the sources I could find were databases, social media, trivial mentions and a number of WP:ROUTINE transactional announcements: [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] Geschichte (talk) 06:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Albania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it fails to pass the notability criteria. Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chen Tao (footballer, born 1995)

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

The claim to notability, playing 17 minutes in the Chinese Super League and 9 games in China League Two, is very weak. The sources are not enough to rectify that – being WP:ROUTINE, match reports or not about him – and as such he fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 06:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and China. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jung Sang-hoon (footballer)

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

The claim to notability, playing 4 minutes in the KLeague and some in lower divisions, is weak. The sources are not enough to rectify that, and as such he fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 06:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and South Korea. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 13:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Mass media in Cuba. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propaganda in Cuba

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

Article created 2012-11-30 by User:Wikijem1287, and creating this article has been this account's only action on WP. The article then, and still now, is almost entirely referenced to some secret CIA "restricted report". (If this account were less than a year old, I'd put in the effort to track this person down, if only to hear the stories!) One section, Granma (newspaper), has outside sourcing, but that has a main article; one other outside source supports a single unremarkable fact about the Cuban Institute for Friendship Among People (ICAP) (that institute is probably notable for its own article, but there's none yet on es.wp). Finally, the diff from article creation to now indicates that no significant material was added and more importantly, no significant replacement sourcing was added. The reason it's not WP:TNT is that the article, as an abstract title, lacks RS to justify its own notability (I'm sure such RS exist, but then let whatever completely new article emerge organically from that research, instead of trying to refill the outline of a probable hoax.) SamuelRiv (talk) 06:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cuba-related deletion discussions. SamuelRiv (talk) 06:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment just for the sake of context the CIA report can be read here. A different version is here, which was declassified earlier and is probably what this article was built off of. So, not a hoax, but I'm not sure if we should be citing things to declassified CIA reports. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:50, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Googling the document title would have taken me a lot less time than copy-pasting all those templates. All the refs have to be checked now, but in principle there's nothing wrong with citing a freely-available government report (especially since it was made open long ago, and was even it seems declassified upon release in 1985, so probably has had a lot of independent review in case something was totally insane) -- it's imo better than a quite a few alternative types of RS, with the chief problem in this case being its age.

Redirect and merge is my new recommendation (but only a very small amount of content) per User:1ctinus below. SamuelRiv (talk) 14:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Mass media in Cuba as a WP:POVFORK of said article. -1ctinus📝🗨 11:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ramneek Wayne

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

I don't think G11 should be an option, hence I brought this to AFD. Article doesn't meet WP:GNG. I know that this autobiography may/will be reinstated if declined again and again at AFC. Additionally, it's very promotional. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Businesspeople. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @SafariScribe I made some addition to the reliable sources and believe its meet the requirement of Wikipedia:GNG Ramie.vee (talk) 06:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HI @SafariScribe that person I am writing for a successful entrepreneur and supporting 157 people living with disability in Australia, In upcoming time he is public and political figure. I will highly recommend read the newspaper article or any source, you will get idea what I am trying to say Ramie.vee (talk) 06:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete An orphan article. Overly promotional. Probable WP:AUTOBIO. LibStar (talk) 12:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:NOTRESUME applies. WP:ROTM business person who fails WP:BIO. Article is WP:ADMASQ 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: as per other comments - additionally, could not find acceptable sources (especially secondary ones). LR.127 (talk) 23:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HI sources from news paper arent legit? 175.37.85.217 (talk) 00:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: promotional tone, without adequate sources that are independent of the subject, and not enough criteria to satisfy WP:BIO.Ira Leviton (talk) 07:55, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the sources are

https://www.cbdnews.com.au/bringing-change-to-the-disability-sector/

https://dandenong.starcommunity.com.au/news/2024-07-29/ndis-help-in-high-demand/attachment/disability_421422_07-jpg/

https://www.teecareagency.com/blog-posts/a-message-from-our-founder 58.84.184.132 (talk) 13:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. I'm closing this as Keep as the deletion rationale is not true. The content of this article hasn't been merged to Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu Police which is a redirect, not an article. If editors are interesed in a Merge, that's a discussion that can happen outside this AFD discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:44, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daman and Diu Police

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

Daman and Diu Police is now merged with Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu Police. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 02:34, 8 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 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No valid deletion rationale. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Daman and Diu#Administration. Not really much to sustain an article that goes beyond the basics, and it can be split out again if it grows. Geschichte (talk) 06:59, 14 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!} 02:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article needs cleanup and could do with some more content, but I find it highly unlikely that a police force of a union territory of India would not be notable. The nom has also not provided a clear rationale for deletion, as simply the fact the organisation no longer exists is irrelevant per WP:NOTTEMPORARY. AusLondonder (talk) 09:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Following the advice of a participant and closing this AFD, which started on August 24th, as "No consensus". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Stephen Curry

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

Similar to other articles in the Career achievements of basketball players category, this is a collection of indiscriminate trivia with trivial statistical cross sections sourced primarily to non-secondary sources such as the AI website StatsMuse and Basketball Reference. As such, this is a violation of WP:NOTSTATS and does not meet the notability criteria under WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, the most pertient info is already found in the main article. Let'srun (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alot of what is in the article should go but there are sources out there that specifically discuss Curry's career achievements such as from Sky Sports and NBC Sports. Whether it is enough for a standalone article, I'll let others decide. Alvaldi (talk) 14:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Some relevant policies are WP:INDISCRIMINATE:
To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources. As explained in § Encyclopedic content above, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.
WP:NOTSTATS:
Statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing; accordingly, statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability, and articles with statistics should include explanatory text providing context.
The article lacks the context that those policies expect to put the collection of bullet items into perspective for the reader.—Bagumba (talk) 15:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The AI site StatMuse is cited almost 200 times on the page. Consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 400 § StatMuse and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association § Statmuse is that the site is not reliable and the AI nature of the site amounts to WP:OR, as the editor enters queries to get results from a WP:PRIMARY source database. Per the WP:SECONDARY policy:
Wikipedia articles usually rely on material from reliable secondary sources.
—Bagumba (talk) 15:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is a recent related AfD on a Hall of Famer who transcends basketball that was closed as "delete".—Bagumba (talk) 07:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment After reviewing the page again, I went on to delete large chunks of trivial content that lacked merit and/or were unsubstantiated. All StatMuse references and any inferable content from sites such as ClutchPoints and Basketball Reference (database-searched content) have also been removed to retain credibility and avoid the violation of WP:NOTSTATS. Furthermore, franchise and college-based records have been tabulated to enhance readability. It is fair to say that the current version is far sleeker and concrete with credible citations (with the exception of a handful of records which I am in the process of finding the right sources for). As the page's latest version also shows, Curry has an extensive list of notable records and milestones. Incorporating them in one page seems like a more organised and logical approach to me. In addition, it is common knowledge that Curry, like Bryant and James, is generally considered an all-time great with a significant impact on the sport. However, the achievements pages of the latter-two (Bryant's and James') have a wide range of unverified content, particularly Bryant's, that still stand without any corrections being made. The notion of whether Curry warrants a standalone records page may not seem like a "no-brainer", but its closure seems unjustified if each factor in this comment is considered in totality.—Beemer03 (talk) 14:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Treating this on its individual merits and making no comparison with the Kareem Abdul-Jabbar discussion. On balance, this subject is a desirable and valid WP:SPINOFF; desirable because the corresponding section of the main Stephen Curry article is very long; and valid because I can find existing references which discuss his achievements and records in a standalone manner [21] [22]. Most comments above represent problems which can and should be solved by improvement, not deletion. Aspirex (talk) 21:01, 7 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!} 01:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:NOTEVERYTHING is my biggest concern with this page:
Information should not be included solely because it is true or useful. An article should not be a complete presentation of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject.
Then there is WP:NOTSTATS and the lack of commentary. Curry's impact on changing basketball by dominating as a smaller player with 3-point shooting is the bigger story. The slew of records feel secondary, and the niche ones that involves multiple conditions (e.g. "Oldest player in NBA history to average over 30 points per game through the first 10 games of a season") feel especially trivial. How many get historically mentioned years after the actual game? But with data and technology, these are available and oft-mentioned during and after a game. Beemer03 had been working to pare the cruft from the page. I think it will take some time to make the necessary editorial decisions on what should be on this page, and then decide if the remaining content is worthy of a standalone page.—Bagumba (talk) 04:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba: then perhaps draftify is the way to go for now? And maybe the page can be restored to mainspace if there's consensus at a relevant centralized venue like WT:NBA. Left guide (talk) 08:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A few points at WP:DRAFTNO suggest not draftifying. I don't see any gross policy violations that compel me to !vote to draftify. —Bagumba (talk) 08:16, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. No consensus through this whole process.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz:: I'm content to have this close as a "no consensus", freeing further discussion from the time constraints imposed by an AfD. You can consider me a procedural weak delete if that will make it happen. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 05:30, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I found this source from Fadeaway World which offers thorough in-depth secondary analysis of Curry's key career achievements. Left guide (talk) 06:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fadeaway World might not be reliable per related discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of NBA career ejections leaders. At any rate, the discussion here is more about whether a dedicated page is needed, not necessarily the topic's notability. Per Wikipedia:Notability:
This is not a guarantee that a topic will necessarily be handled as a separate, stand-alone page. Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article.
As we pare the page's trivial bullet items, this will become easier to determine. —Bagumba (talk) 08:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to List of radio stations in Missouri. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:37, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Good News Voice

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

After a review of the references in the article, I'm not convinced this network meets WP:NCORP. The sources included here are merely FCC records and the website for the organization, and a source for additional sourcing came up empty. Let'srun (talk) 02:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Companies, and Christianity. Let'srun (talk) 02:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of radio stations in Missouri: the list not only includes all four full-power stations (which operates solely in Missouri), but even mentions the network name in each station's entry in that list. This is probably another artifact of the pre-2021 looser inclusion standards in this topic area — which is a problem when networks are apparently considered to fall under NCORP rather than the slightly-more-lenient (regarding sourcing quality) GNG. Alas, there's probably only so much significant coverage a relatively run-of-the-mill religious network is likely to get. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with WCQuidditch that we should redirect to List of radio stations in Missouri. This is another article that I created under the looser inclusion criteria of the time. I have been going through the list of articles I created and tagging G7 the articles that I had created that fail by today's standards, and probably would have gotten around to this article and tagged it myself. While I would usually lean towards deletion rather than redirecting for a network, the fact that all stations are in Missouri and the network's name is included in the list as the owner, redirecting is the right option here.--Tdl1060 (talk) 16:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Arneil Walker

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2010. Not clear that the subject passes WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 02:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Architecture, and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A professor emeritus at a large university with an OBE strikes me as notable; an OBE probably counts as "a well-known and significant award or honor" per WP:ANYBIO. I suspect there will be reviews of his books out there, which is important per WP:AUTHOR; here is one, for instance, and here is another. Admittedly, his web presence isn't big. Josh Milburn (talk) 06:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. An architect and lecturer, he went on to author and co-author several books that appear to be important in terms of architectural reference guides. I've added some references to show that his works have been reviewed across several decades. I think he clearly is notable when judged against WP:AUTHOR. Drchriswilliams (talk) 11:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:AUTHOR and WP:HEY thanks to edits demonstrating sufficient published reviews of his books. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. Bearian (talk) 00:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawing per WP:HEY. Thanks to all those who rescued this article and improved it.4meter4 (talk) 01:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Howland Island#Itascatown (1935–42). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:36, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Itascatown, Howland Island

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

This article's history contains slow-moving reversals of redirects by an anonymous editor. The text is copied word-by-word from the Howland Island, lacking context here and thus creating a WP:CFORK much worse than the original (note the "on the island" in the very first sentence without identification of the island). The anonymous comment match the actions in maturity ("Mommy I want to do color flags please?", [23]). IMHO the article should be replaced by a Redirect to Howland Island. WP:PROD was reverted by an anonymous editor, so escalating to establish consensus so repeated rollbacks will become legit. Викидим (talk) 02:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Oceania, United States of America, and Islands. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy redirect This very obviously does not need to be a separate page from or duplicative to Howland Island#Itascatown (1935–42). Meyerton, Baker Island should also be merged to Baker Island. Reywas92^Talk 20:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Draftify‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simón Veras

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

There is no evidence this athlete passes WP:GNG/WP:NSPORT. I can find no WP:SIGCOV. (Contested PROD.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Dominican Republic. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 07:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:42, 15 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.

[1] We didn't see it coming: "This City" is a groundbreaking work in Israeli cinema

[2] המצעד העברי של וואלה! תרבות לשנת תשע"ו - עשרת הגדולים

[3] ttps://www.calcalist.co.il/style/article/sjtnoezru

[4] ttps://www.imdb.com/name/nm6689252/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t1

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]