User:Cyberbot I/AfD's requiring attention: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:37, 13 September 2024

Below are the top 25 AfD discussions which are most urgently in need of attention from !voters. The urgency for each AfD is calculated based on various statistics, including current number of votes, time until closing date, number of times relisted, overall discussion length, etc. This page is updated by a bot roughly every 6 hours, and was last updated on 22:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC).

AfD	Time to close	Votes	Size (bytes)	Score
Anabwani I of Bunyoro	2 months ago	3	6777	1629.43
The Fleeting Ends	2 months ago	0	3320	1385.87
Turkish Informatics Olympiad	2 months ago	0	3625	1374.56
Dumitru Găleșanu	2 months ago	1	3682	1314.28
List of career achievements by Stephen Curry	2 months ago	1	9469	1294.33
Jon Gibson (Christian musician) (2nd nomination)	2 months ago	2	8671	1234.34
Miyu Takahashi	2 months ago	1	5287	1228.14
Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan	2 months ago	2	4411	1208.05
Amel Rachedi	2 months ago	4	6829	1199.61
Yogacharya Govindan Nair	2 months ago	3	7148	1166.84
JOJ WAU	2 months ago	1	3535	1157.11
Nutan (Nepalese actor)	2 months ago	1	3535	1151.46
Mizuki Otake	2 months ago	2	3785	1138.24
Josiah Akinloye	2 months ago	2	3875	1133.91
Bouheida	2 months ago	1	2811	1104.35
UPEI Student Union	2 months ago	1	4810	1093.63
Markíza Dajto	2 months ago	2	4601	1078.81
Galactic Theme	2 months ago	4	8125	1073.64
Ulrich Lange	2 months ago	0	5317	978.83
Zoë Paul	2 months ago	1	4014	976.12
Ela Gawin	2 months ago	0	5419	974.37
Siege of Badami (1786)	2 months ago	1	14901	966.03
Tumor alopecia	2 months ago	1	6365	961.61
The Desert Song (Max Liebman Presents)	2 months ago	1	3492	956.49
American Silver Eagle mintage figures	2 months ago	2	3713	940.29

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. Happy to restore to draft if someone is able to identify a reliable source confirming his existence. Star Mississippi 13:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Anabwani I of Bunyoro

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

This appears to be a hoax, or at the very least non-notable. The article was created by User:Anabwani2007, whose only edits consist of creating and editing this article, as well as adding a mention of Anabwani to Omukama of Bunyoro. None of the links presently given in the article even mention Anabwani. I wasn't able to find even a mention in reliable sources either. A Ugandan newspaper, Daily Monitor, mentions him in an article, but that's it (and their list is sourced to the monarchy's website anyway, where he's similarly merely mentioned once). toweli (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Uganda. toweli (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Weak Keep most sources on the article are self-published, however per WP:MONARCH he is considered automatically notable as a sovereign ruler. Azarctic (talk) 23:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Well, the issue is, I'm not sure if he's even real (I haven't seen a mention of him predating the 2010s), and even if we count that particular newspaper article as reliable (which I'm not certain that it is), the only thing we can say is that he existed, which isn't enough for a standalone article. toweli (talk) 23:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
In general, the Daily Monitor holds a left-leaning editorial bias and is reasonably fact-based; however, they poorly source information. The articles does really need more reliable sources for verification which is why I made my vote a weak keep. Azarctic (talk) 11:11, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 00:04, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep note that the source used for this was likely oral, and his being mentioned in a literate source should be enough to put it beyond reasonable doubt of him being genuine

Kowal2701 (talk) 15:17, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

The only source stems back to an honours mill that just had a half-dozen articles deleted within the last month for self-published promo. How is this any different if it’s all stemming from an interested party? —Greens vs. Blacks (talk) 04:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Dubious at best. Each source finds its way back to a self-published honours mill. Wikipedia is not here to boost the claims of unreferenced, unverifiable pedigrees. —Greens vs. Blacks (talk) 04:41, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep: I did a search, and there does seem to be quite a few sources on the topic, so that mostly rules being a hoax. And of coarse WP:MONARCH makes the topic notable. Lordseriouspig 20:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Could you link some of those sources? toweli (talk) 20:12, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If sources exist, add some to the article. Just saying sources exist and not providing any, does not improve the state that the article is in. Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 21:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Userfy. He might have existed, but right now this page is borderline TNT. Can someone please adopt this article and fix it? Bearian (talk) 00:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete. We can't keep this; we can barely tell if this person even existed. I found zero scholarly sources whatsoever. -- asilvering (talk) 07:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

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

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

The result was delete‎. The sole argument for retention has been refuted. Star Mississippi 13:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

The Fleeting Ends

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

Not seeing anything that would make this a pass under WP:BAND. No in depth reviews, charting records or significant awards or recognition. Mccapra (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Pennsylvania. Mccapra (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Not Sure': I updated existing references and added some additional ones. It looks like the band was active 2008-2015 and then again in 2018 with Vantine and others. For the reformed band in 2018, the references I found list different people than the article originally named (I changed the article to reflect what's in the sources). The originally named people are in pictures that are part of the article but I can't find any sources that link them directly to "The Fleeting Ends". There is coverage of this band in the local Philly outlets that cover indie bands, it's more limited outside - I see some newspaper articles that announced tour dates and the Popmatters magazine article about a release in 2018. I'd rather someone with more knowledge about WP:BAND weigh in. Nnev66 (talk) 16:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:59, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep There are reliable sources here. In fact, NBC increases the notoriety of the article. Alon9393 (talk) 22:31, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait--this? That's nothing but a video, with the video gone, from a local affiliate. Drmies (talk) 22:50, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Drmies We are in a generation of rapid consumption, of TikTok, YouTube, the video is what is produced, I don't see why it can't be there, and the quotes are from the American national network NBC. Alon9393 (talk) 22:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

You misunderstand. The video is NOT there, and even if it were, it wouldn't mean a thing. "They appeared on TV" is not a claim to notability, certainly not if it's a local affiliate: no, it's not NBC, it's the Philadelphia affiliate, Channel 10--WCAU. Drmies (talk) 23:30, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

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!} 05:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Turkish Informatics Olympiad

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

Tagged uncited for 15 years and does not exist on Turkish Vikipedi. If it is notable maybe some competitors or former competitors could cite this? Chidgk1 (talk) 09:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

For reference: I think relevant trwiki article is this: tr:Ulusal Bilim Olimpiyatları Tehonk (talk) 21:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks I have linked Chidgk1 (talk) 14:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

There are propably enough sources. But in Turkish, unfortunatly. Luhanopi (talk) 19:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

All the sources in the Turkish article are Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu Chidgk1 (talk) 15:00, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

If you would like to cite Turkish sources that would be great Chidgk1 (talk) 15:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 14:57, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete – No encyclopedic relevance or sources demonstrating the slightest of WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 07:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

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 13:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Dumitru Găleșanu

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

There is no clear evidence of notability. The subject has won three obscure prizes: that’s it. I also suspect paid editing: the article is by a new account, with links to google.pk. I would imagine that someone from Pakistan whose very first article is about a random Romanian poet was paid to publish. Biruitorul ^Talk 13:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Law, and Romania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
weak keep: Some reviews/critical discussion in Romanian sources [1] and [2], might be more in Romanian sources. Oaktree b (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
One of the two links is to the introduction of his book, so not exactly impartial. 161.132.213.116 (talk) 01:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Worth noting that the creator has been locked for UPE; this article therefore might need significant cleanup. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:17, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

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)
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)
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)
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)

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)

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 [3] [4]. Most comments above represent problems which can and should be solved by improvement, not deletion. Aspirex (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

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)

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)
@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)
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)

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)

@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)
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)
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)

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. ✗plicit 04:04, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Jon Gibson (Christian musician)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Jon Gibson (Christian musician) (2nd nomination)

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

I propose this article for deletion because there are many, many, many "sources" but which are often profiles and biographies sometimes written by the artist himself and anonymous users, the sourcing is horrible and it is difficult to find your way around, if the article is eligible it is absolutely necessary to rework the sourcing, I tried to improve it, but... SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 23:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Also a lot of these "sources" come from databases like AllMusic, are there any press articles or better quality elements? SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 01:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: I have applied {{subst:afd2}} to this nomination, which did not previously have the full AfD formatting. No opinion or comment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Military, Christianity, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:22, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Keep has had a No.1 hit album and other hits on Billboards Top Christian Albums chart and also has coverage in album reviews on reliable sources such as AllMusic and CrossRythmns. Also this is significant coverage with a byeline here, and also here. The article can be rewritten or shortened but AfD is not for clean-up purposes, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 18:48, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello @Atlantic306, I am not against keeping the article and you may be right about the non-necessity of this Afd, I could not find where I could make this type of request. But in the current state the article should be put back in draft and be republished later when a sorting of sources will be done because the article is hardly clear in the current state SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 09:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, although it happens articles older than 6 months are not supposed to be moved to draft so if it is kept it needs to be fixed while in mainspace, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The sourcing on this article is a mess. Far, far too many citations to sources that don't help with notability, which makes assessing it very difficult. I have gone through every single reference and found exactly one that in my opinion shows notability: Soultracks bio, which looks like an independent and in-depth biography. Doing a search, I have found: Hot Hits book, a little snippet; Charisma and Christian Life, a frustratingly obscured piece that looks to be mostly about an album but I can't be sure. The second source Atlantic306 has noted is an interview, which cannot contribute to notability (sorry).

In short, based on the sources I could find, delete. It feels like there should be enough RS somewhere out there, but they're not in the article and I can't find enough to say keep. Atlantic306, do you have access to any offline sources that are pushing you towards keep? He seems like he ought to be notable...maybe some of his albums are notable and we could redirect? StartGrammarTime (talk) 07:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I don't have access to any offline sources but there are quite a few book results in a google search which I cant assess unfortunately as either its a small snippet given or none at all. Reviews of his music do count towards notability so I would include the reviews on CrossRythmns and on AllMusic (the paragraph ones, not the single sentence ones), imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment: SparklingBlueMoon, why is this AFD called Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Gibson (Christian musician) (2nd nomination) when there has been no Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Gibson (Christian musician) nor a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Gibson? Why is this the 2nd nomination? Was there a previous AFD under a different page title? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello @Liz, when I tried to make the nomination manually a message told me that there had already been a result before but it is not impossible that it was an error. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 22:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need some more opinions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

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. A case has been made that more sources sufficient to meet BLP requirements can be found with more time. Star Mississippi 13:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Miyu Takahashi

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

Fails WP:BLP and WP:NBAD Stvbastian (talk) 11:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Badminton, and Japan. Stvbastian (talk) 11:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment: I found this which is fairly in-depth. There's also this, this, and some other routine coverage. Likely not enough to meet WP:NBASIC but I would not be surprised if there was more coverage out there. I just don't know where to look or how to read Japanese. C F A 💬 16:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Keep - As the runner-up in the 2024 Indonesia Masters Super 100 I, she and Mizuki Otake have finished on the podium of a BWF World Tour tournament passing WP:NBADMINTON. DCsansei (talk) 20:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Being a BLP, the threshold for retention is higher. More source analysis would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Draftify. NBAD is irrelevant when NSPORT itself is not met. The Hochi link does seem to cover her playing beyond the one tournament, but it is not enough to overcome the stricter SIGCOV requirements in place for high school-age athletes (which she was at the time). Draftifying might give people a bit more time to find more recent sources. The other two links identified above are pretty routine tournament recaps. JoelleJay (talk) 02:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

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.

If you disagree with WP:NBAD, then think it would be better to get a consensus to change the guideline itself instead of arguing for selective circumvention. DCsansei (talk) 11:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan

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

Does not seem to be notable. Tagged unsourced for over a decade and the Kurdish article has no sources either. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Middle East. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Keep - as usual, articles shouldn't be tagged for AfD based on the lack of references in the article at present, but based on the availability of potential sources for expansion. A quick google books search reveals plenty of material that could be used, based on both Kurdish and Turkish versions of the name, which could be used for sourcing and expansion before bringing the article to AfD process. --Soman (talk) 15:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- For example, you might want to note wordings like "We will now briefly go through the expressions employed about the 'armed struggle' by the three prinicipal groups which had remarkably drawn more popular support among the Kurds of Turkey than the PKK in the late 1970s. The Vanguard Workers Party of Kurdistan (PPKK ..." (Turkey's Kurds: A Theoretical Analysis of the PKK and Abdullah Ocalan, my emphasis) --Soman (talk) 15:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Draftify It should not be in mainspace. Ben Azura (talk) 08:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:33, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep – Reliable sources exist. Dratifying an old article is a waste of time. Yue🌙 04:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:02, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Amel Rachedi

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

Not finding sufficient WP:SIGCOV of this individual who "presents" a show on her own Instagram channel to meet WP:GNG. She doesn't appear to meet any SNG either. There's just this story in WalesOnline; the rest is tabloid coverage excluded as SIGCOV under WP:SBST, or it's in unreliable sources like Forbes contributors. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Entertainment. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Weak keep: Some coverage in a newspaper from Jamaica [5]. With the Wales newspaper, just barely enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 02:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Radio, Television, Internet, England, and Wales. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Catfurball (talk) 15:53, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no firm consensus. Also, participants, avoid "per X" comments which are practically valueless.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

keep coverage available, see first comment --ProudWatermelon (talk) 01:00, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

So, ProudWatermelon, are you ignoring my advice or making a joke? Sigh. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
what ? ProudWatermelon (talk) 07:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
I guess rewriting the same argument as more value, sure ProudWatermelon (talk) 07:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
And the "Sigh" was just unnecessarily rude and provocative ProudWatermelon (talk) 07:07, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

You think "sigh" was rude and provocative? Compared to names I've been calles on this platform, it seems polite to me. It is just expressing exasperation, it's not about you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus. A discussion of specific sources and whether or not they help establish notability would be welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Insufficient coverage in reliable sources. The Jamaica Gleaner piece reads as promotional rather than as journalism. Sandstein 06:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 14:19, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete The WalesOnline source is essentially a promotional interview. Nothing else presented or found remotely meeting RS. BusterD (talk) 04:44, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

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 03:53, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Yogacharya Govindan Nair

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

I don’t see any sources in English to support WP:AUTHOR. The subject has written multiple books but I see no in-depth reviews, just online bookshops and Wikipedia mirrors. Mccapra (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, China, and India. Mccapra (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The Twenty Seventh Edition of his book was released on the International day by the publisher who published his book nearly 4 decades ago. here is the link https://www.instagram.com/dcbooks/p/C8eOMOMyNxz/?hl=en&img_index=1 2405:201:E010:706F:F0B9:15A2:5E91:AA5B (talk) 13:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Delete. No sources on the page. Fails WP:NBIO. Fails WP:NAUTHOR, who is not widely cited by peers or successors. As Author and Yoga instructor, subject has not created a significant or well-known work and I cannot find subject's work in multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work. Fails WP:GNG too. RangersRus (talk) 13:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. The article creator objects to deletion (see User talk:Versatilegeek#Nomination of Yogacharya Govindan Nair for deletion) so I don't think Soft Deletion is an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

There are sources for the article and there is no ground for deleting this page. Lack of contribution does not necessitate deletion of a page. Such a practice will only contribute to removal of information about the lesser known people. I strongly oppose the deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Versatilegeek (talk • contribs) 07:14, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I just noticed this comment which was placed outside the discussion so I have moved it here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment to the objection that “there are sources” my response as nominator is that I don’t doubt that the subject is the author of multiple books. What there is not is anything that demonstrates notability. We don’t allow bio articles sourced almost entirely to online shopping sites with dead links. In addition not a single detail of the subject’s life is even verifiable based on the refs in the article or anything else I can find in English. I don’t think it’s acceptable to retain an entirely unverified bio on the strength of a claim that “there are sources.” Mccapra (talk) 06:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep This article here from the Times Group, https://malayalam.samayam.com/feature/special-stories/who-was-yogacharya-govindan-nair/articleshow/101135876.cms, seems like a credible source describing the subject as the populizer of yoga in Kerala. Given the Indian context, it is not necessary that a historical subject, especially in Kerala, should be widely cited in the English media to be notable. Pinknetwork123 (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

As you say, sources don’t have to be in English. They can be in any language but if they exist this discussion is the place to share them. Mccapra (talk) 20:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment: I believe the Malayalam samayam source mentioned by Pinknetwork123 is WP:CIRCULAR. The feature story reads exactly like it was generated from this Wikipedia article, with no new information. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:26, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Not able to find any coverage in reliable sources or reviews of his books. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:07, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

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 TV JOJ. ✗plicit 00:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

JOJ WAU

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

Probably not notable. I could only find this: [6], [7], [8]. This probably does not constitute significant coverage. Janhrach (talk) 17:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Slovakia. Janhrach (talk) 17:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to TV JOJ. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
I agree with redirecting. Even though these are sister channels, TV JOJ is the primary one, and its article provides some information that may be of interest to ones looking up JOJ WAU. Janhrach (talk) 17:50, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am not sure about the merits of the proposed redirect as the article lists that target page (TV JOJ) as the sister station to this one. Any additional thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 19:11, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Nutan (Nepalese actor)

Previous AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Nutan (actor)

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

Deleted in January as Nutan (actor). Still doesn't seem to meet WP:NACTOR. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Nepal. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

As the person who accepted this article, initially I thought he might meet the general notability guideline, but now looking back, yeah, he doesn't. Delete. OhHaiMark (talk) 12:29, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Search about him on Google, YouTube and other websites. I think he meets the general notability guideline. Most of his articles are in Nepalese language, so you might be thinking that way. Thanks! 111.119.49.66 (talk) 14:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion, so relisting to come to clearer consensus to delete the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 20:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Josiah Akinloye

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

Fails WP:GNG or any SNG, the sources are not speaking for the subject in question. Largely lacking WP:SIGCOV in WP:RSes. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Weak Keep. Leaning weak keep, because there are sources that point to significant coverage about him. I am just that not sure if there is consensus (doesn't seem like it on archived RS feed) that conclude tribuneonlineng.com or guardian.ng to be generally unreliable. Those two plus a couple of paragraphs on thenationonlineng.net, make up reason to pass WP:SIGCOV and GNG. Prof.PMarini (talk) 06:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete: very much not notable, from the "30 under 30 list" to the typical puffy articles from Nigerian media, this individual isn't suitable for wikipedia. I'm not finding any suitable sourcing either. Oaktree b (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete. I agree that the sources are significant coverage and that there's enough volume here to pass GNG. But otherwise I'm with Oaktree - these are promotional, puffy, and non-WP:RS sources. -- asilvering (talk) 18:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

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 Bouhdida. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Bouheida

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

I couldn't find sources to add verifying this information. Boleyn (talk) 10:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Comment. Is this Bouhdida? Geschichte (talk) 13:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Redirect to Bouhdida Geschichte (talk) 20:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

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 University of Prince Edward Island. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

UPEI Student Union

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

While UPEI is notable, the union does not inherit that notability. This serves as a promo piece. Wozal (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Canada. Wozal (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment: The union receives very regular coverage from the CBC:

And from, as far as I can tell, at least one other outlet:

https://www.saltwire.com/atlantic-canada/lifestyles/20-questions-with-upei-student-union-president-camille-mady-100895015/

So maybe it can still go in UPEI, but you can’t dismiss this out of hand. Mrfoogles (talk) 15:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 09:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Merge - to the university. The secondary sources both on the article and listed here, are transactional in nature, rather than the detailed sources that are required to show notability. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 20:54, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more opinions. So, is what being suggested by one editor a Merge to University of Prince Edward Island? It helps if you provide a link to the target article as there might be several articles that exist on the same overall subject.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

'Merge to UPEI. University student unions are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, but this one hasn't really been sourced properly for the purposes of establishing notability, which means it should be discussed in the university's article rather than having its own standalone spinoff. Bearcat (talk) 18:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

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. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Markíza Dajto

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

I previously PRODded the article with the rationale being "Not notable - no in-depth independent coverage". It was deprodded by Mushy Yank with a note to look at the Slovak article. There indeed are some sources, but the only claims they make about this channel are:

that it became available on DVB-T (with some technical details), and
that Towercom resumed broadcasting it.

These two claims hardly constitute significant coverage, therefore I am renominating this article for deletion, this time at AfD. Janhrach (talk) 10:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Slovakia. Janhrach (talk) 10:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Keep as a WP:SPLITLIST of Markiza, a major Slovak network.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
The article is not a list. It is an ordinary article about the channel – it is list-like because of its low quality. The article on Markíza also shouldn't be list-like; it even carries the "not a directory" improvement template. Janhrach (talk) 15:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
SPLITLIST is not only about stricto sensu list articles, but anyway, yes, the article is a list. It has an introduction but it is very much in the list format, as yourself admit. As for the rest, feel free to discuss it on the article TP. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
I do not see why would this article count as SPLITLIST. The article Markíza is about a different, sister, channel; not about the company (at least primarily).

Also, quoting from WP:NLIST: "Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables." Janhrach (talk) 06:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Markíza as ATD. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:41, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

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. From arguments and the source analysis, it appears that references don't provide SIGCOV. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Galactic Theme

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

Fails WP:NALBUM. Sources are announcements of the album or unreliable. CNMall41 (talk) 19:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, and Nigeria. CNMall41 (talk) 19:56, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Delete: While the sources are reliable, the pieces are unreliable. I can't rely on a news piece that lacks a byline. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
The only source without byline in the article is the New Music Weekly and that's how the website is. I've added more refs by the way. 102.88.68.119 (talk) 11:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep: Refs added. Like Vanderwaal said, the sources are reliable. Also, the album has received multiple reviews from reliable publications per WP:NALBUM. 102.88.68.119 (talk) 11:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 02:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep: The sources added make it pass WP:NALBUM Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 02:44, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete: This needs a closer look hence my assessment.

A 146 words articles from ThisDay does not constitute as in-depth coverage for me. Even though it has a byline, I have concerns that it is a paid job.

I have no opinion on whether London Daily News has on online presence after being defunct but the byline in this article clearly states that it was written by a “LDN Guest Post” aka contributor and is likely to have been written and submitted by the subject of the article.

This 193 words articles from Sheen Magazine credited the photo to Johnel. This is very, very likely to be a paid post.

This article on Teen Ink is clearly written by a contributor named Jon who’s profile there would remove any doubt of that being Johnel hence this fails WP:INDEPENDENT.

This articles reads like a press release to me and so fails INDEPENDENT. Further search shows that you can indeed submit a post to NMW for some few bucks (see here).

This compilation from Encomium reads just fine to me but cannot on itself establish notability as it is a marginally reliable source (according to WP:NGRS). Best, Reading Beans 16:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

So you're saying that the artist is a Journalist too? Maybe you should include that in the main article and back it up with a reliable source if you think so.

Understandably, it's your opinion, but to assume and conclude that some of the sources are written by a notable artist himself and also disregard the sources that are obviously independent even when there is no indication in any of the sources that any payment was made nor it's an advertisement is just sad. This was submitted as a draft and accepted once with just one attempt because it's obviously notable. But it looks like until a 10,000-word written article from The New York Times or BBC is provided, then you might reconsider. 105.112.209.5 (talk) 20:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

You can sign up here if you wish to contribute to Teen Ink. This shows how posts are ranked in Teen Ink. Liz, I am not implying that he is a journalist, I am saying that he is writing and submitting to these outlets! I don’t think that this needs rocket science to achieve. To the IP, a 10,000-word written article from The New York Times or BBC would make me to reconsider. Best, Reading Beans 09:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like more consideration of the sources here since opinion is divided. I don't think a similarity in names is any evidence that an 18 year old musician has somehow become a journalist. Let's assess their value and not assume this is autobiographical writing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep. I am concerned about deletionism from the editors familiar with the Nigerian space. Different standards are obviously applied to independent sources. A lot of suppositions about articles being paid for, yet without evidence. There’s just too much arbitrariness or unilateralism applied. Unfortunately, articles about likely-notable subjects are constantly suppressed. I saw editors haggling over Deborah Paul Enenche as if she was obscure in Nigeria. We probably need to check why these editors with Nigerian background continue to suppress articles. Are they protecting a lucrative trade whilst at the same time alleging that subjects constantly pay media? I checked on Upwork and loads of Nigerians offering services for Wikipedia articles. 102.164.36.86 (talk) 21:10, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

If you have concerns about undisclosed paid editing, mail paid-en-wpwikipedia.org. I would also like you to note as in the case of Eneche and this subject here, popularity does not constitute notability (please, read WP:BIO and WP:GNG to fully understand how this works). Best, Reading Beans 01:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete: This artist is not notable, because it’s all Pr and paid up in which people can now adays submit their post to be published as guest post that’s what he being doing based on what I have observed check his Spotify [9] and YouTube [10] really considering that a notable artist will be having 90 streams a month and only 30 YouTube subscribers, I guess he hasn’t reached the Notability guidelines as a musical artist to be on Wikipedia.Madeforyou33 (talk) 11:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)— Madeforyou33 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Keep: IMO, These are quite enough sources this, added after afd, supposedly a reliable newspaper and this per WP:THREE. Esthersp (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
@Esthersp, not trying to badger you but the Encomium magazine article is just passing mention (among other 99 other complications) and can be used to verify an information but not to establish notability. The source from a “supposedly reliable newspaper” is a 146-word article, the last one from London Daily is written by a contributor (please, see WP:CONTRIBUTOR). Now, with this analysis, you would find it out that the first two does not count as significant coverage (please, WP:SIGCOV). For a subject to be considered notable, IMO, it needs sources that are independent of the subject, reliable and has in-depth significant coverage. (Keep in mind that WP:THREE is an essay not a policy). Best, Reading Beans 01:33, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for that Esthersp (talk) 01:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete : Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnel.--Gabriel (……?) 23:52, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment: I figured I’d help the community out here. Previous attempt was misunderstood by Liz.

**Source assessment table: prepared by User:Reading Beans**
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://web.archive.org/web/20240717083831/https://www.londondaily.news/vanguards-of-the-new-wave-five-african-teen-artists-to-know/	? The author is labelled LDN Guest	The source is a noted book by a well-known author	{{ And now, with his latest release, ‘Galactic Theme,’ he’s embarked on a voyage that transcends musical borders, a journey that not only showcases his versatility and creativity, but also his ability to connect with listeners across the globe.}} This is the only mention of the album there.	✘ No
https://genius.com/albums/Johnel-ng/Galactic-theme		Song lyrics, annotations and descriptions on Genius are mostly user-generated content and are thus generally unreliable. Please, see WP:GENIUS		✘ No
https://web.archive.org/web/20240427065757/https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2024/04/27/johnel-soars-into-space-with-new-galactic-theme-album		per WP:NGRS	A 146-word article is not considered as significant coverage.	✘ No
https://www.sheenmagazine.com/johnel-is-touring-the-universe-with-new-galactic-theme-ep/	?	? Even though this page exist there’s no byline in these articles	Ditto. This time 193-words.	✘ No
https://newmusicweekly.com/johnel-ng-announce-new-long-play-galactic-theme-inspired-by-a-futuristic-life-outlook/	{{…the singer said in a press release.}}—curated from the article but said press release was not linked. WP:PRSOURCE	? I don’t consider this reliable per this link	? not really	✘ No
https://encomium.ng/?p=400108-the-100-best-african-compilations-of-2024-so-far		~ marginally reliable source per WP:NGRS		✘ No
https://www.teenink.com/opinion/movies_music_tv/article/1219379/Johnel-Travels-Universes-On-Galactic-Theme-Long-Play	? This is a user-generated post.	We don’t consider user-generated posts reliable. See WP:USERG.	per same reasons above—143-words.	✘ 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}}.

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Ulrich Lange

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

Only source is a self-published website anyone can edit. It's certainly possible that this could be a notable topic, although I was unable to locate entries in standard music reference works that cover people like this such as the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians or Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. Both foreign language wiki articles are built off of the same source. A reasonable WP:ATD could be redirecting this to Thomaskantor. 4meter4 (talk) 14:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 16:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Weak keep, I found mentions of him in some books:

Bach's Famous Choir, The Saint Thomas School in Leipzig, 1212-1804, devotes about a paragraph to Lange on page 22, where it's mentioned that he composed St Mark Passion which was performed into the 17th century

The Renaissance: From the 1470s to the End of the 16th Century, gives another paragraph to the subject on page 276 Microplastic Consumer (talk) 16:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately the second source is only available in snippet view, so it is hard to judge the depth of coverage. The first source largely covers his contributions as Thomaskantor which could easily be used to expand that article. I'm still not convinced a separate article is needed on this person. It's borderline.4meter4 (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Here is a screenshot from that second book. More digging found a german language source from 1920 published by the University of Illinois; Geschichte der deutschen Musik von den Anfängen bis zum Beginn des Dreissigjährigen Krieges which on page 411 discusses Lange. Monatschrift für Gottesdienst und kirchliche Kunst mentions him on page 184 as well.

Meister der Renaissancemusik an der Viadrina, Quellenbeiträge zur Geisteskultur des Nordosten Deutschlands vor dem Dreissigjährigen Kriege seems to have some info on Lange (p 78) prior to being Thomaskantor, but is just a snippet. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 18:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment same source [11] as used in my discussion for the Otto AfD (right above this one)... I'm more clear about Otto's deletion discussion than this one, I'm not sure if this person is notable or not. Otto has a lack of sourcing.Oaktree b (talk) 05:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 17:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

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!} 05:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Zoë Paul

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

Fails WP:ARTIST. No awards or recognition. Created by a single purpose editor so possible promo. Sources provided merely confirm where she has exhibited and not SIGCOV. This source seems to be the only indepth coverage. LibStar (talk) 05:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Visual arts, South Africa, and Greece. LibStar (talk) 05:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Found some additional WP:RS coverage of Paul: Frieze magazine, The Design Edit, Vice (referenced in the article but needs to be archived), StudioInternational (referenced above)

CaptainAngus (talk) 23:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep: there are several articles in art magazines about her work and its significance. I added one today that I found. I think she meets criteria 2, 3, and 4d of WP:Artist. Nnev66 (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Please review article improvements.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Again, please provide a review of sources and any improvements made to the article since its nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep - she meets GNG based on reviews in Artforum, Frieze, and Studio International; she's produced a window installation at MoMA. It is quite early in her career, and she does not yet meet WP:NARTIST, but after a BEFORE search I think that there's enough significant coverage to support an article based on the general notability guideline. Netherzone (talk) 02:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep per Netherzone, meets GNG. Randy Kryn (talk) 08:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Ela Gawin

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

The article is mostly based on primary sources, while the secondary sources are mostly unreliable, being as follows:

[12] prawdaoeligawin.blogspot.com is an attack site directed at the article subject, extremely unacceptable for a biography.
[13] celebryci.info is a gossip site, unacceptable for a biography.
[14] dramki.pl is a gossip site, unacceptable for a biography.
[15] vibez.pl is a tabloid, which shouldn't be used for biographies.
[16] Not sure if kobieta.wp.pl is considered reliable. Due to legal reasons the cited article doesn't disclose the subject's last name but only the first letter, so I'm not sure if this is compatible with BLP.
[17] truestory.pl is a tabloid, which shouldn't be used for biographies.
[18] krakow.naszemiasto.pl is a local newspaper. It may be considered reliable, but like some sources above, it doesn't disclose the subject's surname, only the first letter.
[19] wiadomosci.gazeta.pl is, I think, a tabloid, so I doubt it would be considered reliable here. Like the others, it doesn't disclose surname except for the first letter.
[20] pomponik.pl is a gossip site, unacceptable for a biography.
[21] o2.pl is, I think, a tabloid, so I doubt it would be considered reliable here. Like the others, it doesn't disclose surname except for the first letter.

Overall, even if someone can show that WP:GNG is narrowly met, this article is still a glaring WP:BLP violation, so I believe it would be the best to WP:TNT it regardless. NicolausPrime (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Poland. NicolausPrime (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Photography, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:50, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

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) 03:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Siege of Badami (1786)

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

Y. N. Deodhar is not WP:RS/WP:HISTRS, nor WP:SCHOLARSHIP, they are not a historian and are thus an unreliable source. Google scholar wields no results; [22]

Sanish Nandakumar is not a historian, and has a B.S in economics, they are in no way scholarship, especially only having made one book. - No results on google scholar: [23]

This page is poorly created with a spam link of sources in each paragraph.

The other sources provide little but a passing mention. [24] Noorullah (talk) 21:34, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Noorullah (talk) 21:34, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, and Karnataka. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:36, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep

Y.N. Deodhar is a M.A. and also a PHD in history which is mentioned in the source used in the article itself. [25] and Another source calls Y. N. Deodhar an “veteran historian” [26]. Also your search results doesn't even mentions the name of "Y. N. Deodhar".

Y. N. Deodhar's book [27] along with these two reliable sources [28] (page no 52-53), [29] (page no 178-179) clearly gives significant coverage to the event. GroovyGrinster^{Talk With Me} 13:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Y.N Deodhar is not cited as having a PHD in history, he's not even on google scholars, which is what you pointed out for me by saying "your search results doesn't mention the name", yes, that's the point, he's not a scholar cited on google scholars.

And I'm sorry but "Venkatesh Rangan" is not a historian, he's an author. [30]

Deodhar, already unreliable as aforementioned, his book provides little insight. The two other sources you cited, are already responded towards, Govind is not a historian. Noorullah (talk) 23:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Move on from Google Scholars. I'm not gonna talk about Y. N. Deodhar again because I've already provided an source which literally calls Y. N. Deodhar an “Veteran historian”.

Although Venkatesh Rangan mentions Y. N. Deodhar as a historian, I've no idea that why does it matter that Venkatesh Rangan is a historian or not because Venkatesh Rangan's book isn't even used anywhere in the article that's totally irrelevant in the AfD (WP:AADP).

Even the Uttarakhand Open University here [31] (page no 239) mentions Y. N. Deodhar as a historian.

Govind Sakharam Sardesai is a famous historian,[32] there is literally a Wikipedia article on him (Govind Sakharam Sardesai) which also calls him a historian. GroovyGrinster^{Talk With Me} 10:33, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

The book written by Govind is outdated per WP:RAJ(1946). Couldn’t find much info about Deodhar other than the links you’ve showed. I guess he’s okay based on what I’m reading, but if that’s the only reliable source that mentions this, then I’m not sure it requires its own separate article.

“Consequent upon the capture of Badami, the strong fort of Bhadur Band capitulated to the Marathas and Haripant proceeded to capture copal, another fort about four miles distant.” There’s only one line that mentions this battle in Deodhars book, and there are no other details other than “it was captured”. This tells me that this event lacks Wikipedia:Notability, which means it doesn’t warrant its own article if it’s based on one line from a book. The other sources don’t seem reliable or fall under WP:RAJ. Someguywhosbored (talk) 07:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep:

As per explanation given by @GroovyGrinster the article is notable and sources provided are WP:RS giving significant coverage of this Siege even if we don't consider YN Deodhar the other two i.e Sen, Sailendra Nath [33] (page no 52-53) and Sardesai Govind Sakaram [34] (page no 178-179) clearly gives significant coverage to the event.

Malik-Al-Hind (talk) 07:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Govind is WP:RAJ. His book was written in 1946. Which makes it outdated. Deodhar makes a small mention of Badami being captured but doesn’t mention a siege or any other details beyond that. As I’ve mentioned before, this event lacks notability, and I already pointed out many of the issues within this article. Someguywhosbored (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete:

Not convinced that this needs its own article. Only reliable source here is from Deodhar and it’s one line about it being captured, with no other extra details or information(see context above). In fact it doesn’t even mention a siege, only that the town was captured. This article lacks Wikipedia:Notability. Govinds book appears to fall under WP:RAJ which makes it an unsuitable addition for any article. The other sources don’t appear to be reliable either per noorullah. One throwaway line/passing mention of this event doesn’t warrant a separate article.

Edit: I’m beginning to think that WP:SYNTH and WP:OR is at play here. How did the user who wrote this article get all this information from one line in Deodhars book? I don’t see how he got the numbers in the info box, nor how he managed to fill an entire article based on a throwaway line. Non of the information in the body for example seem to directly relate to the capture of Badami. There’s no mention of any of that in regards to Deodhars book. So again, there’s barely any information about the CAPTURE(not siege) of Badami in the sources provided. Most of this article employs original research and synth. Even the title is OR, there was no battle. Majority of the information here is falsified. Someguywhosbored (talk) 07:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The Capture/Siege of Badami is given significant coverage in these two sources [35] (page no- 53-54), [36] (page no- 178-179). This source mentions this conflict as Siege of Badami in the page number 52 [37].

WP:RAJ doesn't apply to Govind Sakharam Sardesai's Book because it only applies to caste related stuff. Hence Govind Sakharam Sardesai's Book is a WP:RS, Also WP:RAJ isn't a policies or guidelines of Wikipedia, it's only an Essay. And All of the sources pass WP:RS, Can you explain that how according to you they aren't reliable? GroovyGrinster^{Talk With Me} 14:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I can see why you’d assume that it only applies to caste related topics but that’s not the case. This has been discussed many times in the past especially on RSN, but typically, all sources that fall under the raj era are not seen as reliable. While the essay written by sitush focuses on caste, most of the same issues mentioned there apply to all raj era historians.

And btw, Govind was already picked apart in RSN for the same reasons I mentioned(WP:RAJ), it’s an outdated source.

“Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 291#Reliability of Govind Sakharam Sardesai

“The sources I have seen suggest that it was first published in 1928, which makes it a bit dated, I have no opinion on the accuracy of the source though. “

“I see to recall being informed that prior discussions has found any source published under the Raj was automatically not an RS”

Anything that was written during the raj era is outdated and thus not RS. Sitush can clarify this further for you if you’d like to ask him, as he’s already discussed this detail many times in the past.

“Also WP:RAJ isn't a policies or guidelines of Wikipedia, it's only an Essay”

It’s an essay written by one of the most prolific writers of Indian historical topics on Wikipedia. Sitush is a content expert. And this is something that has generally been accepted by the community. Raj era sources are typically almost always viable for removal.

Furthermore, the point of the essay was to let the readers know that RAJ era sources are unreliable and outdated. So even if this isn’t a policy(which is irrelevant, this issue was discussed multiple times), WP:RS still exists. We are looking for high quality sources on wikipedia, not outdated work from the raj era. And as I’ve clarified, Govinds work has already been picked apart by RSN.

“Can you explain that how according to you they aren't reliable”

well I should clarify what I actually meant. look at this source for example https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69209/page/n56/mode/1up

it actually doesn’t seem unreliable based on what I’ve read, so this source is fine but where is the siege of Badami mentioned? I can’t find the quote in the page numbers cited. It seems that this was likely mistakenly added in. So we can’t use this source for information it doesn’t even have. Now as for the final source

https://archive.org/details/dli.csl.7298/mode/1up

There is no page number cited so I can’t even find where it mentions Badami. Furthermore I can’t find any info about the authors credentials, but even if he was reliable, where has he written about the the siege of Badami?

it seems to me that out of all these sources, only one of them mentions anything about Badami. Not that there was a siege mind you. Deodhar makes a passing mention of the town being captured and that’s it. There is no other details. So again, why is this a separate article? After checking all the sources, I realized this article is far more problematic than initially anticipated. The text doesn’t even correspond with what’s written in the sources cited. Someguywhosbored (talk) 17:35, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source assessment by one of our more experienced editors would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:38, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Delete per Someguywhosbored. Full of unverifiable and unreliable claims. Mccapra (talk) 16:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Delete per someguywhosbored. No need for a separate article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

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. The merger discussion can continue on the Talk, if desired. Star Mississippi 03:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Tumor alopecia

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

There is only one source that talks about tumor alopecia and it only includes one small paragraph on the topic:

"Tumor alopecia refers to halr loss in the immediate vicinity of either benlgn or malignant tumors of the scalp. Synngomas, nerve sheath myxomas, and steatocystoma multiplex are benign tumors that may be lim~ted to the scalp and cause alopecia. Alopecia neoplastica 1s the designation glven to halr loss from metastatic tumors, most often from breast or renal carcinoma."^[1]

^ James, William D.; Berger, Timothy G.; Elston, Dirk M.; Odom, Richard B. (2006). Andrews' diseases of the skin: clinical dermatology. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier. p. 762. ISBN 0-7216-2921-0. OCLC 62736861.

The source provided is a tertiary source I believe so this doesn't have any secondary sources covering it. Also this page reads like a dictionary definition. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 04:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath, a medical school textbook (which is what's cited there) is generally considered an ideal source in MEDRS terms.

I also wonder whether you're focusing too closely on the exact name given in that one source, when the subject (i.e., hair loss in the immediate vicinity of either benign or malignant tumors of the scalp) might have other names. One of the two sources in ==Further reading== on that page talks about "neoplasm-related alopecia" and the other is about "Alopecia due to cancer". This review calls it "Hair loss in neoplastic conditions".

It would be undesirable to delete an article about a whole subject if what it really needs is to WP:MOVE it to a different title and add some more content. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I read over general notability guidelines and saw secondary sources and I think I may have focused too much on that. I was the one that added the further reading sources in an earlier search for some material on the topic. While the original source does distinguish tumor alopecia from Alopecia neoplastica would it be appropriate to merge the pages? I was able to expand the page Alopecia neoplastica a bit. Or possibly mention tumor alopecia on the page Alopecia and redirect there? I will search for literature regarding tumor related alopecia that’s not referred to by that name. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 05:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Merge with Alopecia, or perhaps move to Cancer-related hair loss and expand further? There doesn't seem to be enough to work with here to write a standalone article, and I don't think Alopecia neoplastica and Tumor alopecia need to be separate articles, but this topic definitely warrants mentioning somewhere. I think a standalone article on cancer-related hair loss (incorporating hair loss from both the disease itself and from treatments) could work, with a mention of non-cancerous tumor-induced hair loss in the main alopecia article. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 05:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It looks like there is support here for a Merge but not agreement yet on the Merge target article. There has to be consensus on that before this discussion can be closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is no consensus on what to do here. What does the nominator think about a possible Merge or Redirect and to what target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

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!} 21:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

The Desert Song (Max Liebman Presents)

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

Declined twice at WP:AFC moved by creator to main space, no evidence of notability, just listings and passing mentions. Theroadislong (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Television. Theroadislong (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Keep: https://playbill.com/article/the-dvd-shelf-a-connecticut-yankee-desert-song-four-weddings-and-a-funeral-honeymoon-in-vegas-and-more-com-181767 ; one paragraph in Thomas McCavour's 2020 The Gayety & Other Stories ; various mentions in reliable books, so that a redirect to the programme or to the operetta is totally warranted in my opinion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC) https://www.reformer.com/local-news/more-vintage-tv-musicals-from-the-50s/article_9fbb2418-386a-52ae-858c-8488a27fea3c.html (pretty slow to open but significant)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep Playbook review is significant coverage - six paragraphs about the movie/DVD transfer. Brattleboro Reformer not exactly a major outlet review, but it's five paragraphs. Well done @Mushy Yank for finding these sources.

To that I'd add William Leonard, Stage to Screen to Television[38] at 426 which not only has a lengthy paragraph but also documents a New York Evening Post (later NY Post) review by Thornton Delehanty. Oblivy (talk) 01:18, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. For the record, it's Playbill not Playbook. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

American Silver Eagle mintage figures

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

WP:NOTDIRECTORY/WP:NOTSTATS. It is not clear why we have these statistics. Not all facts make good encyclopedia articles, no attempt is made to explain why these figures are of enough importance to give them a separate page. Fram (talk) 08:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep - is cite-able and notable as world bullion repository currency. -MJ (talk) 08:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Lists, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Merge back into American Silver Eagle - This article was WP:BOLDly split without discussion. - ZLEA _T\^C 15:32, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting discussion. We have arguments to Delete, Merge and Keep. We need to come to a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

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.

[n378-1] James, William D.; Berger, Timothy G.; Elston, Dirk M.; Odom, Richard B. (2006). Andrews' diseases of the skin: clinical dermatology. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier. p. 762. ISBN 0-7216-2921-0. OCLC 62736861.

[1]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 __NOTOC__
-Below are the top 25 [[WP:AFD|AfD]] discussions which are most urgently in need of attention from !voters.  The urgency for each AfD is calculated based on various statistics, including current number of votes, time until closing date, number of times relisted, overall discussion length, etc.  This page is updated by a [[User:Cyberbot I|bot]] roughly every 6 hours, and was last updated on 17:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC).
+Below are the top 25 [[WP:AFD|AfD]] discussions which are most urgently in need of attention from !voters.  The urgency for each AfD is calculated based on various statistics, including current number of votes, time until closing date, number of times relisted, overall discussion length, etc.  This page is updated by a [[User:Cyberbot I|bot]] roughly every 6 hours, and was last updated on 22:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC).
 {|class="wikitable"
@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 !Score
 |-
-|[[#Anabwani I of Bunyoro|Anabwani I of Bunyoro]]||{{Time ago|20240824191611}}||3||6777||0||'''1613.35'''
+|[[#Anabwani I of Bunyoro|Anabwani I of Bunyoro]]||{{Time ago|20240824191611}}||3||6777||0||'''1629.43'''
 |-
-|[[#The Fleeting Ends|The Fleeting Ends]]||{{Time ago|20240831055836}}||0||3320||0||'''1369.86'''
+|[[#The Fleeting Ends|The Fleeting Ends]]||{{Time ago|20240831055836}}||0||3320||0||'''1385.87'''
 |-
-|[[#Turkish Informatics Olympiad|Turkish Informatics Olympiad]]||{{Time ago|20240831094517}}||0||3625||0||'''1358.55'''
+|[[#Turkish Informatics Olympiad|Turkish Informatics Olympiad]]||{{Time ago|20240831094517}}||0||3625||0||'''1374.56'''
 |-
-|[[#Dumitru Găleșanu|Dumitru Găleșanu]]||{{Time ago|20240831130146}}||1||3682||0||'''1298.22'''
+|[[#Dumitru Găleșanu|Dumitru Găleșanu]]||{{Time ago|20240831130146}}||1||3682||0||'''1314.28'''
 |-
-|[[#List of career achievements by Stephen Curry|List of career achievements by Stephen Curry]]||{{Time ago|20240831130412}}||1||9469||0||'''1278.29'''
+|[[#List of career achievements by Stephen Curry|List of career achievements by Stephen Curry]]||{{Time ago|20240831130412}}||1||9469||0||'''1294.33'''
 |-
-|[[#Jon Gibson (Christian musician) |Jon Gibson (Christian musician) (2nd nomination)]]||{{Time ago|20240830234303}}||2||8671||0||'''1218.29'''
+|[[#Jon Gibson (Christian musician) |Jon Gibson (Christian musician) (2nd nomination)]]||{{Time ago|20240830234303}}||2||8671||0||'''1234.34'''
 |-
-|[[#Miyu Takahashi|Miyu Takahashi]]||{{Time ago|20240901110933}}||1||5287||0||'''1212.11'''
+|[[#Miyu Takahashi|Miyu Takahashi]]||{{Time ago|20240901110933}}||1||5287||0||'''1228.14'''
 |-
-|[[#Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan|Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan]]||{{Time ago|20240831151600}}||2||4411||0||'''1192.04'''
+|[[#Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan|Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan]]||{{Time ago|20240831151600}}||2||4411||0||'''1208.05'''
 |-
-|[[#2024 Bengal Pro T20 League|2024 Bengal Pro T20 League]]||{{Time ago|20240829180429}}||4||15481||0||'''1191.89'''
+|[[#Amel Rachedi|Amel Rachedi]]||{{Time ago|20240830015223}}||4||6829||0||'''1199.61'''
 |-
-|[[#Amel Rachedi|Amel Rachedi]]||{{Time ago|20240830015223}}||4||6829||0||'''1183.53'''
+|[[#Yogacharya Govindan Nair|Yogacharya Govindan Nair]]||{{Time ago|20240831054017}}||3||7148||0||'''1166.84'''
 |-
-|[[#Yogacharya Govindan Nair|Yogacharya Govindan Nair]]||{{Time ago|20240831054017}}||3||7148||0||'''1150.84'''
+|[[#JOJ WAU|JOJ WAU]]||{{Time ago|20240902172741}}||1||3535||0||'''1157.11'''
 |-
-|[[#JOJ WAU|JOJ WAU]]||{{Time ago|20240902172741}}||1||3535||0||'''1141.06'''
+|[[#Nutan (Nepalese actor)|Nutan (Nepalese actor)]]||{{Time ago|20240902192347}}||1||3535||0||'''1151.46'''
 |-
-|[[#Nutan (Nepalese actor)|Nutan (Nepalese actor)]]||{{Time ago|20240902192347}}||1||3535||0||'''1135.43'''
+|[[#Mizuki Otake|Mizuki Otake]]||{{Time ago|20240901142742}}||2||3785||0||'''1138.24'''
 |-
-|[[#Mizuki Otake|Mizuki Otake]]||{{Time ago|20240901142742}}||2||3785||0||'''1122.2'''
+|[[#Josiah Akinloye|Josiah Akinloye]]||{{Time ago|20240901155150}}||2||3875||0||'''1133.91'''
 |-
-|[[#Josiah Akinloye|Josiah Akinloye]]||{{Time ago|20240901155150}}||2||3875||0||'''1117.85'''
+|[[#Bouheida|Bouheida]]||{{Time ago|20240903105837}}||1||2811||0||'''1104.35'''
 |-
-|[[#Bouheida|Bouheida]]||{{Time ago|20240903105837}}||1||2811||0||'''1088.28'''
+|[[#UPEI Student Union|UPEI Student Union]]||{{Time ago|20240903144359}}||1||4810||0||'''1093.63'''
 |-
-|[[#UPEI Student Union|UPEI Student Union]]||{{Time ago|20240903144359}}||1||4810||0||'''1077.62'''
+|[[#Markíza Dajto|Markíza Dajto]]||{{Time ago|20240902101548}}||2||4601||0||'''1078.81'''
 |-
-|[[#Markíza Dajto|Markíza Dajto]]||{{Time ago|20240902101548}}||2||4601||0||'''1062.77'''
+|[[#Galactic Theme|Galactic Theme]]||{{Time ago|20240831195540}}||4||8125||0||'''1073.64'''
 |-
-|[[#UP T20 League|UP T20 League]]||{{Time ago|20240903203549}}||1||3171||0||'''1060.03'''
+|[[#Ulrich Lange|Ulrich Lange]]||{{Time ago|20240905145951}}||0||5317||0||'''978.83'''
 |-
-|[[#Galactic Theme|Galactic Theme]]||{{Time ago|20240831195540}}||4||8125||0||'''1057.58'''
+|[[#Zoë Paul|Zoë Paul]]||{{Time ago|20240905055443}}||1||4014||0||'''976.12'''
 |-
-|[[#Ulrich Lange|Ulrich Lange]]||{{Time ago|20240905145951}}||0||5317||0||'''962.83'''
+|[[#Ela Gawin|Ela Gawin]]||{{Time ago|20240905162015}}||0||5419||0||'''974.37'''
 |-
-|[[#Zoë Paul|Zoë Paul]]||{{Time ago|20240905055443}}||1||4014||0||'''960.13'''
+|[[#Siege of Badami (1786)|Siege of Badami (1786)]]||{{Time ago|20240904213430}}||1||14901||0||'''966.03'''
 |-
-|[[#Ela Gawin|Ela Gawin]]||{{Time ago|20240905162015}}||0||5419||0||'''958.3'''
+|[[#Tumor alopecia|Tumor alopecia]]||{{Time ago|20240905040414}}||1||6365||0||'''961.61'''
 |-
-|[[#Siege of Badami (1786)|Siege of Badami (1786)]]||{{Time ago|20240904213430}}||1||14901||0||'''950.01'''
+|[[#The Desert Song (Max Liebman Presents)|The Desert Song (Max Liebman Presents)]]||{{Time ago|20240905122613}}||1||3492||0||'''956.49'''
 |-
-|[[#Tumor alopecia|Tumor alopecia]]||{{Time ago|20240905040414}}||1||6365||0||'''945.6'''
+|[[#American Silver Eagle mintage figures|American Silver Eagle mintage figures]]||{{Time ago|20240904081847}}||2||3713||0||'''940.29'''
 |}
@@ Line 69: / Line 69: @@
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miyu Takahashi}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Workers Vanguard Party of Kurdistan}}
-{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Bengal Pro T20 League}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amel Rachedi}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yogacharya Govindan Nair}}
@@ Line 79: / Line 78: @@
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UPEI Student Union}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Markíza Dajto}}
-{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UP T20 League}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galactic Theme}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ulrich Lange}}
@@ Line 86: / Line 84: @@
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Badami (1786)}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tumor alopecia}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Desert Song (Max Liebman Presents)}}
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Silver Eagle mintage figures}}