Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

WP:AFD/Y

Purge page cache if page isn't updating.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< September 16	September 18 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Maria Veretenina

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

The sources used are from organization websites that have a direct connection to the subject. No independent sources are used. Not clear that the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 23:56, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Estonia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arete Kerge

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

Most of the article is cited to the subject's own website. Not clear if the subject meets WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 23:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Estonia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OSINT for Ukraine

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

Non-notable organisation, lacking WP:RS to meet WP:NORG, WP:GNG. Cabrils (talk) 23:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Military, Organizations, Netherlands, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rezaul Kabir

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

Fails to meet the Wikipedia's notability guidelines for Academicians WP:NACADEMICS. WP:NOTRESUME Charlie (talk) 18:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Finance, and Management. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article provides summary information to a large audience (i.e., students, academics, scholars, journalists, policy makers) who are interested in academic work on several business related subjects / topics. The content of the article is credible as it includes references to published / verifiable / reliable sources. RRLV (talk) 18:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete at this stage, notability is not established although he has a decent amount of citations over the course of his career so one could argue for criterium one https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=c_EQTfoAAAAJ&hl=en

JamesKH76 (talk) 10:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Acceptable citations in a high cited field. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Don't see enough WP:RS PaulPachad (talk) 21:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per WP:PROF#C1, which is independent from GNG and not based on in-depth independent sourcing. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kadambari Jethwani

AfDs for this article:

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

Just like previous AfD, no evidence support this individual's page meeting WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. Currently, sources cover this person only in the context of a single event which is a sexual harassment case which is still under investigation WP:BLP1E. WP:TOOSOON. Charlie (talk) 17:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Charlie (talk) 17:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Gujarat. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: has at least 3 significant roles in notable productions tient and meets WP:NACTOR -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In line with WP:BEFORE, I checked IMDb, and it appears that none were lead roles. However, if reliable sources indicate otherwise, it could meet the WP:HEYMANN. Charlie (talk) 04:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not lead roles, perhaps, but significant roles, not minor. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sources are poor and most are written from the perspective of subject herself. She is a very minor actress who has not made a significant achievement worthy of notice in her minor career. Fails WP:N and WP:NACTOR. RangersRus (talk) 13:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Essentially a bit-part actor. No indication of significance. Fails WP:NACTOR. scope_creep^Talk 06:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Has significant roles mentioned in filmography. meets WP:NACTOR clearly. Thewikizoomer (talk) 07:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP1E isn't correct too. Thewikizoomer (talk) 07:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thewikizoomer At the moment, there are no reliable sources that mention her roles in the movies listed in the article. If you find any, you are welcome to update the page or share a source analysis at this AfD. Please avoid using interviews or self-quotations. Also, please include any other events or supportive information that would elevate her beyond the BLP1E criteria. Charlie (talk) 05:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~: Stand as per - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kadambari Jethwani (2nd nomination)#c-Thewikizoomer-20240909075000-CharlieMehta-20240903172200 Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:15, 11 September 2024 (UTC) (struck duplicate !vote — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 08:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. A source analysis now would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Engschrift

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

Initially PRODed by me, for the following reason:

In addition to the existing relying on a single source and vagueness issues (likely due to translation), the information in the article could easily be included onto the existing articles – DIN 1451, Austria (typeface), Tern (typeface) and Road signs in Austria – with the provision of sources, weakening the article's basis.

Deletion was objected, a merged was proposed instead. However, it is not possible to redirect one article to 3 others. Created a topic at WikiProject Typography over 4 months ago with no response. The article has no notability on its own, and is poorly written/explained. EthanL13 | talk 22:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Transportation, and Austria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is covered in DIN 1451 in more detail than is here. Nothing in that article gives me the impression that a separate article on DIN 1451 Engschrift would be needed. I did search and Engschrift is always defined together with DIN 1451. Lamona (talk) 02:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okjeo language

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

Okjeo (Okchŏ) was a polity described in the Dongyi section of the Chinese Records of the Three Kingdoms. They surely spoke some language, but not one word of it is recorded. The only information about the language is the statement in the above chapter that "the language is much the same as Goguryeo but with small differences here and there". That is not enough for an article, and is already included in the Puyŏ languages article, which is about four languages mentioned in that Chinese source.

All the references in the article are either paraphrases of that statement or are actually about the Goguryeo language, for which some (controversial) evidence does exist. Kanguole 22:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Although I cannot say if the article should be removed or kept due to my biases with my edits on the article, I just want to say that I don't believe deletion should be an option and at most, make it a redirect to the Puyŏ languages as you say the information is included in the article itself. Spino-Soar-Us (talk) 23:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Puyŏ languages. seefooddiet (talk) 00:58, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, History, and Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I am satisfied with the sources and structure of the page and think it could be retained as a detailed article. Opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 23:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Railway stations in Karaikudi

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

This might work better as a category instead of a page. Charlie (talk) 18:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, Lists, and Tamil Nadu. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to Karaikudi#Transport. Per WP:CLN lists and categories are complementary, and this list has much more information than a category could offer. The nominator gives no reason why they think a category might be better, and I can't think of any. The article could be improved, but that's not a reason to delete. Thryduulf (talk) 09:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 23:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jere Klein

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

Non-notable Chilean musician. WP:TOOSOON. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Cabrils (talk) 23:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Chile. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michal Kolesár

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

No evidence this economist passes WP:GNG, WP:NBIO or WP:NACADEMIC. His h-index is 16, less than half of what would be expected for an average full professor in economics, so there's no pass on criterion 1 and no evidence of passing any other criteria. No WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources comes up for a WP:GNG pass either. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Economics and Slovakia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - courtesy ping to Rosguill and Newklear007, who interacted in the contested PROD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: PROD'ed articles cannot be soft deleted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 23:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johanna Nurmimaa

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

Tagged for sourcing issues since 2016. Not clear if the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 23:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Comics and animation, and Finland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:09, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No significant coverage whatsoever. WP:TOOSOON, if ever. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ribiyanda Saswadimata

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

Replacement of PROD; played youth nationally, but only played 68 minutes with the Eunos Crescent. Might fail WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Roasted (talk) 23:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Roasted (talk) 23:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Clearly fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 00:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:09, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, an above average failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 04:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Han–Xiongnu War (215 BC–200 BC)

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

Fail to see how this is notable, can't find any WP:RS on this "Han–Xiongnu War (215 BC–200 BC)". The creator of this article basically copied the stuff they were reverted (and blocked) for at Battle of Baideng here. They've misused tons of citations here [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9], and recently engaged in copyvio in another article [10], which may also be the case here. Most of the citations left are unverifiable (which is very convenient, I can't look for further violations) and doesn't strike me as WP:RS. HistoryofIran (talk) 21:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is also likely sock/meat puppetry involved here per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hunnic Enjoyer. Two brand new users have attempted to remove the AFD template so far. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, and China. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to hear more opinions in this AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia seems to be attracting ever more of this battlebollox, with users inventing or embellishing actual events. It is remotely possible that there are passing mentions in the alleged sources that have been strung together to create this article, but it has all the telltale signs of a fake. Excellent nomination. Mccapra (talk) 05:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coriantumr (son of Omer)

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

Not eligible for WP:PROD due to unresolved talk page discussion about notability; should be resolved. No independent, reliable sourcing to suggest a standalone page is necessary. Fails the WP:GNG. Goldsztajn (talk) 20:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Latter Day Saints, and United States of America. Goldsztajn (talk) 20:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Book of Ether: as a viable ATD. Star Mississippi 13:52, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There’s only one source that does more than list or suggest how to pronounce this person’s name. That badly fails our foundation of significant coverage, and is borderline original research. Bearian (talk) 19:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Typically, I'd close this discussion as a Redirect as an ATD but there is no mention of this subject at the target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Urutau (3D Printable Firearm)

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

No evidence found of notability, no independent reliable sources about this. Being offered on some sites is not the same as having the necessary sourcing about the subject. Fram (talk) 16:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Technology, and Brazil. Fram (talk) 16:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is also worth noting that this subject has a significant amount of traction on social media websites like Twitter/X, Reddit, and even LinkedIn. This is difficult to directly cite due to its lack of centralization and login requirements. Still, I would like to think that this subject is notable given that it achieved its publishers' requirements for quality. That said, this subject is relatively new, and I am sure that, in time, more direct evidence of notability will become available. Any suggestions to rectify this in the meantime are appreciated. DreamWeav3r95 (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge with 3D printed firearm per WP:PRODUCT. Right now I lean heavier towards deletion as the only sources relevant to the actual gun itself are from what looks like the designer's own website- the other sources make no mention of the gun. Getting social media traction is not in and of itself a qualifier for notability. Archimedes157 (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We do have two interviews/podcast with the developer/designer

which are :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZLD4geWKA4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmZ8dkvOwyM

Also, it is notable that It is the first Bullpup submachine gun/PCC that anyone can make in the world and not based on the FGC-9.

This design is not based on any previous gun design

the only thing it has in common with the fgc-9 is its barrel

I lean toward keeping this page Superlincoln (talk) 14:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
independent reliable sources of the Urutau :

https://homemadeguns.wordpress.com/tag/urutau/

https://3dprintgeneral.com/portfolio/the-brazilian-jstark-ze-carioca-3dpgp-ep19/

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/yveilleuxlepage_about-an-hour-ago-the-files-for-the-urutau-activity-7231845456090165248-8Leu

https://ctrlpew.com/file-drop-the-urutau/ Superlincoln (talk) 15:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Urutau is mentioned in Armament Research Services (ARES) Research Report 8: Desktop Firearms Desktop Firearms:

Emergent Small Arms Craft Production Technologies 2023 update page 30-31

https://armamentresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/ARES-Research-Report-No-8-Desktop-Firearms-2023-Update-EARLY-ACCESS.pdf

I think this is enough independent reliable sources about the Urutau right? Superlincoln (talk) 15:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Printing Terror: An Empirical Overview of the Use of 3D-Printed Firearms by Right-Wing Extremists:

However, recent developments within the 3DPF community are concerning, as they seem to focus on further lowering the barriers to entry for producing 3DPF. Noteworthy developments include the ‘Nutty 9,’ an improved bolt design for the FGC-9 consisting of nothing more than four nuts and two bolts screwed into a printed connector piece, and the development of the Urutau—a soon-to-be-released hybrid pistol-caliber carbine—that is said to be significantly easier to build than the FGC-9.

[11]https://ctc.westpoint.edu/printing-terror-an-empirical-overview-of-the-use-of-3d-printed-firearms-by-right-wing-extremists/

Urutau was mentioned in the 3D-Printed Firearms and Terrorism: Trends and Analysis Pertinent to Far-Right Use

5 times

[12]https://www.jstor.org/stable/48778663?seq=2 Superlincoln (talk) 09:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into List of 3D printed weapons and parts and/or FGC-9. I do not think this meets the GNG yet, though it might be close. The mentions in the academic papers are insufficient to establish notability since they are only trivial, passing mentions with no detail. However, the ARES Research Report is an independent source with several paragraphs on the Urutau. A LinkedIn post by an Assistant Professor at the Royal Military College of Canada seems promising but he admits in the post to having lacking "expertise in that area" thus his post doesn't meet the expertise guideline for self-published sources. As for the blog posts, YouTube videos, and other primary sources, they (in my opinion) all fall well below the bar for verifiability. If another secondary source of the quality, independence and verifiability of the ARES Research Report can be found, I would change my vote. Richard Ye^talk 15:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there are three different suggested Merge target articles. Of course, content can be merged to multiple articles but we need a primary article in order to close this AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I'm not sure the new second amendment is what we're looking for as far a sourcing goes... This is about all the coverage there is [13], rest are un-RS. Seems like PROMO with most of the sourcing being primary. Oaktree b (talk) 00:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merging to "3d printed firearms" is probably the best place to send it to. Oaktree b (talk) 00:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge it into FGC-9 (the primary article) as the gun won't have been designed if FGC-9 did not exist and merge it into the List of 3D printed weapons and parts as the secondary article. Superlincoln (talk) 04:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still lean heavier towards delete, but more people seem to support a merge or at least not totally deleting the article, and I agree with Richard Ye that List of 3D printed weapons and parts is probably the best place to merge it. Archimedes157 (talk) 21:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We still have two target articles being proposed with equal support.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tamara Lund

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

Based on a single source that is self published. Not clear if the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 23:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, and Finland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Iraq, Moscow

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

Fails WP:ORG. Article is based on 1 primary source. LibStar (talk) 23:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Iraq, and Russia. LibStar (talk) 23:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Could say that it is relevant to some future event, in addition the diplomatic headquarters will always be reflected in history in case of a break in diplomatic relations or attacks on them.--Alon9393 (talk) 18:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This vague argument is basically recycling what you said in another AfD [14] LibStar (talk) 11:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was not expecting to have to say that we do not keep articles on non-notable places or organisations in case there's a "break-in" in future. AusLondonder (talk) 22:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AusLondonder, you have expressed an opinion here but not actually cast a !vote. LibStar (talk) 01:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, meant to come back. AusLondonder (talk) 02:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. I can't locate any sources demonstrating any kind of notability, only verifying the embassy does exist. Alon9393's argument amounts to WP:CRYSTAL; in the event the embassy becomes notable in the future, the article could of course be recreated. Fails WP:ORG at present. GhostOfNoMeme 18:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Even giving the Keep vote less weight due to the blocked editor, I don't think this discussion can be closed as a Soft Deletion. Is there an appropriate Redirect target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG. Sourcing is currently non-existent and there's not much evidence of better sourcing being available. AusLondonder (talk) 02:54, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Costa Rica–Libya relations

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

Prod removed, no reliable sourcing added. Mere existence of established relations between sovereign states is not notable, fails the WP:GNG. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Libya, and Costa Rica. Goldsztajn (talk) 23:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I could say that it is relevant to some future event, in addition diplomatic relations will always be reflected in history in the event of a break in diplomatic relations or advances in these. --Alon9393 (talk) 18:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"relevant to some future event" is WP:CRYSTAL. LibStar (talk) 01:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, while I agreed the mere existence of relations is not notable, the article includes information on trade and embassies. I am sure there is more to add as well if one were to research SJD Willoughby (talk) 00:54, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SJD Willoughby@Alon9393: WP:SOURCESMUSTEXIST, WP:CRYSTAL. Wikipedia is not a repository of predictions. If there are reliable sources, please indicate them and I will withdraw. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 03:55, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My point was that notability guidelines concern whether enough sources exist to make a subject notable, not whether there are enough sources in the article which you are focusing on. I am also stating that there is currently enough (though just enough) to keep the article. For example, the information concerning halt in trade relations SJD Willoughby (talk) 04:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I take what Cyprus–Saudi Arabia relations when they proclaimed that it has no references and there are the references, my inclination is to keep it. I am inclined to believe that Costa Rica-Libya Relations exist and have notoriety like all the diplomatic missions of Ukraine that I see no objection to the fact that they do not exist. Alon9393 (talk) 04:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sources have been added, I've quickly examined three and they do not support the information they are attributed to. For example, "When the Rebels Are Not Successful at Establishing a New Government" does not mention Costa Rica recognising the NRT, it states, "It is only on 16 September 2011, that the NTC was recognized by the UN General Assembly as the legitimate representative of Libya." There is nothing substantial analysing Costa Rica-Libyan relations. The article "The endurance of the G77 in international relations" does not mention Costa Rica, and mentions Libya once. There is no reference to relations between the two countries. The article from atlasinfo.fr is repeating a press release from the Costa Rican foreign ministry ("indique un communiqué du ministère costaricain des Relations Extérieures"). To be clear, there is no problem applying WP:EXIST, but as far as I can see, there are no WP:SIGCOV reliable sources to support this topic. Regards,--Goldsztajn (talk) 10:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The artice "The Recognition of Governments" has a single mention of Costa Rica in relation to a legal case from 1923, there is no mention of relations with Libya. There's a citation to an article from researchgate.net which is self-published and unreliable. The other citations are to databases and press releases. The article has been WP:REFBOMBED; there are no independent, secondary reliable sources which analyse with detail relations between the two states. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 10:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus yet. A source analysis would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 01:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not seeing indepth coverage. The relations are extremely limited, and do not include things that make relations typically notable like resident embassies, state visits, significant trade and migration. LibStar (talk) 01:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Major League Baseball career double plays as a pitcher leaders

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

Tagged for notability over three months ago with no sourcing improvements since then. The article's references largely consist of primary/non-independent sources and stats databases, but more importantly, they also all fail verification or only cover off-topic matters; none actually discuss this record or list. At present, this article topic fails WP:NLIST, which requires in-depth significant coverage from independent reliable secondary sources that collate and discuss this list topic's entries together as a group or set to establish notability. A thorough WP:BEFORE search yielded dismal results; the best-quality source I could find was this Guinness World record page, but the WP:RSP entry for Guinness World Records says There is consensus that world records verified by Guinness World Records should not be used to establish notability. Furthermore, it briefly mentions the first-place entry but fails to discuss a group or set of list entries together as required by WP:NLIST. Page 329 of this book offers a sentence discussing the top four entries of this list but since it's published by AuthorHouse, it's an WP:SPS. With all that said, delete. Left guide (talk) 22:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Baseball. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Hashem

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

BLP of the founder of a religious sect. The sect itself appears to be notable but it does not seem that the leader himself is. I think a redirect to Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light would probably be best. Mccapra (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Religion. Mccapra (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Egypt, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now Winter 2006 (Australian series)

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

Does not meet WP:NALBUM. No significant coverage. Folkezoft (talk) 21:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Folkezoft (talk) 21:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Oujda

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

Article created by a now-blocked sockpuppet who had a habit of creating somewhat embellished articles about North African military history. There was some sort of military action in Oujda in 1314 but much of the detail here isn’t supported by the sources and I think TNT is appropriate. Mccapra (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Morocco. Mccapra (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Looks like one of many pseudo-puff pieces about a military engagement that doesn't get more than a sentence or two at most in the cited sources and therefore, logically, could never warrant its own stand-alone article on Wikipedia per WP:NOTABILITY and other content policies. R Prazeres (talk) 22:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now Autumn 2007 (Australian series)

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

Does not meet WP:NALBUM. No significant coverage. Folkezoft (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Folkezoft (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Covet Fashion

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

lacks significant coverage from reliable sources, failing to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Loewstisch (talk) 13:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Loewstisch (talk) 13:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete VICE is major significant coverage, and I found additional SIGCOV here in this physical book, but Venture Beat seems more like an interview/primary source. I am not seeing GNG being passed here. If others discover more, I am willing to change my opinion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I was able to find this article from Fortune, but it requires a subscription to read so I'm unable to assess if it's significant coverage or not. I also found another interview from Venture Beat and short coverage from Bleeding Cool about a New York Fashion Week update - I don't think these really demonstrate notability but they may be useful for a 'development' section if article is kept. Waxworker (talk) 02:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep the coverage in Fortune appears to be an article solely on the topic. The Vice article is clearly above the WP:N bar. The Bleeding Cool one is probably above the bar for "significant". That's 2 or 3 sources, all of which are solely focused on the topic. The other sources have decent information, but appear to be press releases or otherwise primary. Hobit (talk) 14:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete Little significant coverage comfortably independent of the subject. The Fortune, VentureBeat and Vice articles provide significant coverage, but are interspersed closely with interviews and many read like profiles of the business achievements of their creator. The Fortune article reveals itself to be part of a "daily newsletter on the world’s most powerful women", and as you read you get the sense that all its information comes from the developer as the source, which flatters her immensely: "Like any good marketer, Ethington knows her product intimately". Gita Jackson of Vice recounts herself attending a Fashion Week event held by Covet and: surprise! Both she and Covet seem very keen to name drop sponsor fashion brand Badgley Mischka front and centre, as Fuchs says: "“I think Covet provides an opportunity for people to experience Badgley Mischka that wouldn’t otherwise have that opportunity". The other articles, like Bleeding Cool and Disney News, are ephemera around game updates. Needs something a little more evaluative and removed from the creators to suggest it's not held up by puff pieces. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 12:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cambalache Interface Designer

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

No WP:SIGCOV sources given is a primary source Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some secondary sources Wiktorpyk (talk) 10:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Miminity. Just wanted to check if the secondary sources I added are enough to address the concerns? Wiktorpyk (talk) 10:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but, some of the sources you provided are questionable in terms of reliability. See WP:PRS to see what's some of the reliable sources But again I cannot determine them at my own but some sources you added seems like a WP:USERGEN. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Glade Interface Designer#Cambalache: Per nom. Lordseriouspig 21:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for the Redirect suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Hindi songs recorded by Asha Bhosle

AfDs for this article:

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

Monstrously huge and growing unmaintainable fancruft list where most of the tracks do not pass WP:NMUSIC. This is a piece for Schott's Miscellany. Still fails WP:NLIST. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This article has already survived two attempted AfDs easily, and neither of those had a single vote to delete. The nominator this time was also the nominator of the second AfD, and this latest nomination has no acknowledgement of any of the successful arguments made by "Keep" voters previously. The second AfD did have some discussion of how the article is tough to maintain due to the singer's enormously prolific career, and perhaps splitting into multiple articles (perhaps by decade) could be considered. Otherwise this nomination is merely an attempt to pretend that the idea didn't already fail twice. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absolutely not possible to handle this list. Fails WP:NLIST. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 07:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm relisting this discussion given the large participation on the 2nd nomination and the lack of participation here. Also, given two previous AFDs, this discusion is not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Puput Novel

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

Lack of notability Sxg169 (talk) 12:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Indonesia. Shellwood (talk) 13:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep there are enough sources out three to show notability. Im working on more sources. Besides, she is on one other language, which says to me that she is notable. Jeanette Coca Cola girl Martin (salut?) 06:38, 10 September, 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Burnt toast theory

AfDs for this article:

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

Unremarkable non-notable ephemeral Tik-Tok dreck. Perhaps worth a sentence elsewhere…maybe a slang dictionary. Qwirkle (talk) 15:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep... regretfully. It has multiple sources with WP:SIGCOV extending across months of coverage. Not seeing a policy based rationale for deleting this. Unfortunately social media trends often create articles of this type.4meter4 (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: I was intending to nominate it to AfD, saw it was already done. WP:10YT and WP:NOPAGE apply here. Significant coverage, specially in short news articles about a flash-in-pan phenomenon doesn't necessarily mean that a subject must have a page. It can be better covered in a sentence in any of the many articles on very similar cultural concepts, already listed in the "see also" section or at the top. regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 15:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Popular culture, Behavioural science, Engineering, and Internet. Skynxnex (talk) 16:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I have doubts about the topic's notability. It really looks to me like there was just one TikTok post that managed to inspire several copycat pop psychology articles on various websites for a couple of months. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 17:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you make a case that all of these articles are from content farms, you are essentially just reaffirming the subject's notability. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So would the article in The Indian Express negate my whole argument? Clarinetguy097 (talk) 17:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Combined with Glamour, HuffPost, Grazia, and a local station, yes. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll admit I don't actually know how the news cycle operates in those publications. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 15:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All that matters is that we believe major publications until shown evidence of lack of editorial oversight. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now I'm confused. What are they saying that we're supposed to believe? That there've been a handful of posts on social media about burnt toast? Clarinetguy097 (talk) 18:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:GNG. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have, and it says that "Brief bursts of news coverage may not sufficiently demonstrate notability." Clarinetguy097 (talk) 15:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now that's a valid argument. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Blessing in disguise per TryK. Meets SIGCOV, though. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't think that this is notable enough to warrant its own Wikipedia page, and like I mentioned in the discussion to merge it into Blessing in disguise, I don't think that it belongs there either. Feed Me Your Skin (talk) 20:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have only discussed why it does not belong on the Silver lining page, which I agree with; you haven't argued why Blessing in disguise is unsuitable.

(@Feed Me Your Skin, welcome to AfD! In case you didn't know, these discussions don't give you notifications. Click on the star on the top of the page and install User:Aaron Liu/Watchlyst Greybar Unsin.) Aaron Liu (talk) 23:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems like nonsensical mysticism, while burning my toast might prevent me from being hit by a falling meteor, it's equally possible that not burning my toast would also save me, so this theory could be punctured by someone with two brain cells of common sense to rub together. It has only been circulated in clickbait publications, and doesn't feel similar enough to "blessing in disguise". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:30, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are valid arguments against retaining here, but as said above, there are many RSs that SIGCOV the subject. Also, while I sympathize with criticism of the idea, the idea is not a deletion argument and goes under WP:NOTFORUM. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:58, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, the articles are clearly clickbait so I would disagree that they are "reliable sources". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:32, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so you don't like the headlines. How does that have any bearing on the fact that The Indian Express, Glamour, HuffPost, Grazia~~, and a local station~~ (actually, maybe scratch the local station that did not fact check a sponsorship, but what about the rest?) are reliable sources? Aaron Liu (talk) 01:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Has WP:SIGCOV.KatoKungLee (talk) 01:36, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would you like to comment on the Merge argument? Aaron Liu (talk) 02:13, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that user just wants to keep it. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 17:46, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu - I agree that it's a type of sliver lining. I can't say I agree with merging it though. It has enough coverage to stay. KatoKungLee (talk) 00:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or in the alternative, merge to Blessing in disguise. Bearian (talk) 03:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sigcov is not achieved. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have arguments here for Deletion, Keeping and Merging with two different Merge target articles suggested. Remember this is a discussion about the notability of an article subject, let's maintain civility. Some editors just want to present their argument and not get into a debate about it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BookBrowse

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

No WP:SIGCOV of this book review site; references are mostly mentions; awards don't appear to be particularly notable either. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Companies, and Websites. Skynxnex (talk) 16:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep BookBrowse has been around a long time and well known in the book world. It is often cited by other reliable sources, such as The Cambridge History of Postmodern Literature[15], The New York Times[16][17], and dozens of volumes of Contemporary Authors[18]. It was singled out in Public Libraries (journal)[19], The Public Librarian's Guide to the Internet[20], the Chicago Tribune[21], The Bookseller[22], Publishers Weekly ("Book Site Gives Online Buying That Old Store Feel". 6 January 1999); In 1998 was featured by Yahoo! as its Incredibly Useful Site of the Day. It would be nice to have a lengthy article dedicated solely about the site, but these are often hard to find for many topics. The question for trivial coverage is if there is enough material to write an article with, and that has been done. -- GreenC 22:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per GreenC. I also found a decent amount of Newspapers.com coverage, without going too in depth here are some of the sources I found [23] [24] [25] [26]. Also some coverage in these books [27]. Probably more if I looked harder, there's definitely more sigcov in the sea of mentions but I think this is enough for me to vote keep PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abbey Crunch

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

It's a biscuit. Cookie for our US readers. References are no use for WP:V, fails WP:GNG, WP:BEFORE reveals nothing useful 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and United Kingdom. Skynxnex (talk) 16:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless WP:Library convinces upcoming participants otherwise, redirect to McVitie's § Biscuits. First paragraph's a slogan; the rest are mere media mentions. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 08:31, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack of notability, as it does not cite significant independent sources that demonstrate the biscuit's enduring cultural or historical significance --Loewstisch (talk) 09:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is a long defunct biscuit brand. Historically significiant, and unsurprisingly hard to find in-depth coverage. This is still useful uncontroversial content, and is of no commerical benefit to any company. Perhaps a case of WP:IAR. Edwardx (talk) 10:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep WP:NBISCUIT does not appear to exist - however I agree with the above this is no longer a commercial product, and there is sufficient cited sources now in the article to demonstrate a level of cultural impact and give sufficient sourcing to sustain an article, including recipes from secondary sources. ResonantDis_tortion 09:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1989 Germany mid-air collision

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

Per WP:GNG, barely notabile incident, nearly zero sources can be found about it, even in german. SignorPignolini 20:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:09, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Georg Reiter

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

There's no WP:SIGCOV of this judoka, just stats pages and WP:ROUTINE coverage (plus an assortment of unreliable sources). Nothing found in WP:BEFORE search so the subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, and Austria. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Might be notable for world championship, though WP:NSPORT doesn't have any Judo criteria. Nswix (talk) 20:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are some notability criteria at WP:MANOTE. Papaursa (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can find no evidence of a silver medal at the World Military Championships and even if I did it wouldn't be sufficient to show WP notability as it is a small event and other medalists have had their articles deleted. There are also many similar sounding events, but the previous statement is true for all of them. The International Military Sports Council doesn't even show a judo championship in 2010 [28]. None of the sources given show WP:GNG is met nor my search find support for the claim of notability. The International Judo Federation records shows he never competed at a world championship. He did compete at one European championship in 2013 where he lost in the round of 16. World Cup events are not world championships. Notability is not inherited from his father's judo success, although it is a possible redirect target (he's already mentioned there). Papaursa (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ha Khel Sawalyancha

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

Cannot locate sources to show notability. There are a few mentions but nothing that amount to significant coverage. CNMall41 (talk) 18:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CNMall41 (talk) 18:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: because this is a 1976 film and cast, music director and director are all notable and it contributes to the notability of the film. Or redirect to Vasant Joglekar. Very opposed to deletion of the page. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor and unreliable sources. Fails WP:NFILM and WP:SIGCOV. RangersRus (talk) 22:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Czech Republic women's national under-18 softball team

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

Subject lacks the needed coverage to meet the WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Let'srun (talk) 19:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Softball, and Czech Republic. Let'srun (talk) 19:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy

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

Reference book. Stub since forever. No secondary sources, no assertion of notability. Previously deprodded. Sandstein 19:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 19:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep at least four reviews which I have added to the page, 3 of which are decently lengthy, one of which is less so but still sigcov. NBOOK requires 2. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Dastak

AfDs for this article:

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

I have multiple reasons for proposing this article for deletion. Firstly, the page creator is blocked. Secondly, all the references provided are fabricated. The page creator has deceptively used the term 'National Dastak' in the title to mislead other editors. The article fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:WEB from any perspective." Youknow? (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Websites, and India. Youknow? (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The sources do exist, but they're all trivial mentions in lists or attributions - not the kind of discussion of the subject needed to show notability. Adam Sampson (talk) 20:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. This is not G5 eligible, as the creator was not a sock of a then-blocked editor: as such the creator's block is not relevant. And the basic facts provided in the article do check out, it's obviously not a hoax. Whether it's notable, I'm less certain: there is coverage, including articles focused on on this channel: [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], and a handful of others. There's not a lot of detail, hence "weak". Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Reviewed the page and the sources and I do see where the mislead was attempted where title of the sources were changed.
- Source 1 misleading title on the page is "#BeingADalit: How the Online Boom news websites like National Dastak that talk of Bahujan samaj" but the actual title is "#BeingADalit: How the Online Boom is Helping Dalits Reclaim and Reassert Their Identity". There is nothing in the source except for passing mention that says "Yadav has previously worked with news websites like National Dastak that talk of Bahujan samaj."
- Source 2 misleading title on the page is "National Dastak, which provide reportage and videos from a Bahujan perspective to counter the perspective of the upper caste-dominated mainstream English and Hindi media" but the actual title is "BSP war room is turning up the heat on BJP and SP". The source has nothing significant except for passing mention that says "There are also news portals like National Dastak, which provide reportage and videos from a 'Bahujan' perspective to counter the perspective of the upper caste-dominated mainstream English and Hindi media."
- Source 3 has passing mention that goes "There are YouTube channels widely watched by Dalits, including National Dastak...".
- Source 4 has passing mention that goes "Web channel National Dastak played the video of Chandrashekhar Azad addressing the protesters."
- Source 5 has misleading title on the page that says "As per a report of the National Dastak, Riya Singh, a Dalit will pursue Ph D in Women's Studies" but the actual title of the source is "Riya Singh, a Dalit, tops TISS entrance exam". This source has nothing except for passing mention that is shown in the misleading title of the source.
- Source 6 has passing mention that says "In Uttar Pradesh, BJP is the single largest party across the polls except for National Dastak which is predicting BSP victory."
- Source 7 has passing mention that says "Speaking to National Dastak after organizing ‘Blood donation’ programme".
- Source 8 has passing mention "Videos on National Dastak have over 88 crore views." All the sources are poor with no significant coverage on the channel. Fails WP:NCORP. RangersRus (talk) 18:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is based on the sources that exist, not ones that are in the article. When I have provided other sources above, you need to demonstrate that they do not confer notability. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did not look at the sources you provided in your vote but I did now. Source 1 is giving me 404 error, source 2,4,5,6 are all same WP:ROUTINE news about union government asking YouTube to take down ‘National Dastak’ from its platform. Source 2 is likely unreliable as Mumbai Mirror's about us page has comments from Wikipedia and the disclaimer says that it does not take responsibility for the reports by contributors. Source 3 is about the Journalist Anmol Pritam who works for YouTube channel National Dastak and was forced to chant a slogan by a mob and the article has also claims made by the journalist himself to another news media. This is all routine news. Not enough to pass WP:NCORP imv. RangersRus (talk) 20:28, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Vanamonde93 added Ref and WP:NEXIST there is Hindi coverage about the channel.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The issue is that the additional sources provided do not meet WP:WEBCRIT. All of the sources except for two fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA so they are not reliable. This one simply mentions a journalist that works for National Dastak while this one provides some detail but isn't in-depth (and if considered in-depth, that leaves one reference). --CNMall41 (talk) 07:29, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great Britain women's national under-18 softball team

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

Subject lacks the needed coverage from secondary sources to meet the WP:GNG or WP:NORG. Let'srun (talk) 19:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Softball. Let'srun (talk) 19:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RadioactiveGiant

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

Fails WP:NCORP due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. The problem appears to be with WP:CORPDEPTH in particular, since there was only trivial coverage in virtually every source I found. The sources already in the article are IMDB or trivial announcements such as a business agreement or the opening of a studio. Tagged for notability since 2011. Fathoms Below (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Fathoms Below (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lulu Chow Wang

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

Promotional article that doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and United States of America. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: China, Massachusetts, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It feels like there should be more sources about this woman. Searching on her name I find nothing about her but lots of hits on the building at Wellesley that she endowed. There is the one NY Times article about her and her husband giving $25M to the college, and a short mention in another NYT article, both already in the references. There is the fact that she was a trustee at Rockefeller University, and was on the boards of the Metropolitan Museum of Art and other major organizations - and yet, I don't find independent sources. She feels notable. I will cycle back hoping that someone else has better search results. Lamona (talk) 03:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Peek, Liz (2007-05-08). "Lulu Wang Throttles Back (Except on the Racetrack)". The New York Sun. Archived from the original on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  The article notes: "Ms. Wang is one of the original members of the Committee of 100, a group of high-level Chinese-Americans — who include I.M. Pei, Yo-Yo Ma, and Oscar Tang — created shortly after the Tiananmen Square crackdown ... The move was accidental. Her father’s job as a senior official with the Nationalist Party took the Chow family to India during the war years of the 1940s. Ms. Wang was born in New Delhi under the crudest of circumstances. ... Following this path, Ms. Wang moved on to Bankers Trust Co., where she was soon responsible for analyzing about 20% of the Standard & Poor’s 500. ... Ms. Wang opened Tupelo Capital Management in 1998. Her husband, Anthony Wang, had made a fortune at Computer Associates, a firm founded by his brother, which ran into problems after Tony Wang retired in 1992."
2. Zernike, Kate (2000-04-16). "Couple Gives Wellesley a Record $25 Million". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  The article notes: "Lulu Wang is the founder of Tupelo Capital Management, a name chosen tongue-in-cheek with reference to one of Wellesley's more girlish traditions. ... Mrs. Wang has been a member of Wellesley's board of trustees since 1988, and is the first woman to head the board's investment committee, which is in charge of investing the college's endowment, valued at about $1 billion. She also heads the finance committee of the New York Community Trust and serves on a number of other boards in New York, including the Rockefeller Family Fund, WNYC and the Metropolitan Museum of Art."
3. Norton, Leslie P. (2002-12-09). "The Chinese Connection". Barron's. ProQuest 201096765. Archived from the original on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  The article notes: "One newly prominent donor is Lulu Wang, a patrician Chinese-American who runs Tupelo Capital Management, a New York money-management firm. Wang came here with her family from Shanghai in 1948; a vacation became permanent immigration as her father, tied to the Nationalists, opted to stay in America. Her $25 million gift to Wellesley College, from which she graduated in 1966, was given to build a new student center. Construction on the Wang Campus Center will start next year, and finish in 2004. Wang has been active for years in philanthropic circles -- she's a board member of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York public radio station WNYC, and Wellesley. She's also funding Bill Moyers' coming PBS series "Becoming American: The Chinese Experience.""
4. Less significant coverage:
  1. Agnew, Harriet (2022-03-03). "Ark Invest CEO Cathie Wood on everything from deflation to Elon Musk". Financial Times. Archived from the original on 2023-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
    The article notes: "In 1998, as the dotcom bubble was reaching its climax, Wood and one of her colleagues, Lulu Wang, left Jennison to set up a fund in New York called Tupelo Capital Management. By the end of March 2000, the peak of the tech bubble, Tupelo’s assets under management had reached almost $1.4bn, according to a regulatory filing. Twelve months later, Tupelo’s assets had slumped to around $200mn, according to a separate regulatory filing."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Lulu Chow Wang to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 05:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Barrons article is about her father, and gives her a single paragraph, and one that is very similar to other short paragraphs about her. I find it interesting that the NYT article (which also has 2 paragraphs about her, the rest refers to she and her husband as a unit) says that they declined to be interviewed. This may indicate that she has been reticent about publicity, and that may explain why we don't have much about her. Ditto the Financial Times article (which has only a mention of Wang) which says "Wang declined to comment." I did find one more article about her at msnbc. This has a lot of her words so it resembles an interview but isn't presented in interview form. I think it's worth digging, but I am not finding the kind of analysis that would be independent. Everything I see just reiterates the same few facts about her. It's kind of frustrating, I admit. Lamona (talk) 20:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Seet

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

I tagged this article about a musician with notability concerns in April. It is unreferenced. I have returned to it and carried out WP:BEFORE. The only secondary coverage I can find is a mention of his name in CMJ New Music Report 2003 here. I have not added this to the article as it is minimal. I don't think he meets WP:NMUSICIAN. There is no obvious redirect target. Tacyarg (talk) 19:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Canada. Tacyarg (talk) 19:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: there's a review of Thanks To Science, We've Got Love (page 6) by Nightshift (magazine), a review of Melatonin by Exclaim!, and a review of Arousal Disasters + an article by Now (newspaper). Jonathan Seet's website has a section for reviews of his music, although a lot of them are short and/or from non-reliable sources. It's also interesting that one of the reviews is by someone who goes by LMNOP, and that User:Mnlop is a single-purpose account for the Seet and Seet-related articles. toweli (talk) 19:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 19:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Zero WP:RS and lack of WP:SIGCOV PaulPachad (talk) 21:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. No notability or SIGCOV found. cyberdog958^Talk 06:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article is unreferenced, has been unreferenced since 2005 despite not being officially tagged as such until earlier this year, a WP:BEFORE search really didn't turn up enough to turn the tide (a couple of the sources found above by Toweli are okay but not in and of themselves enough, and I didn't find a whole lot else), and nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass WP:GNG on better sourcing than we've been able to find. Bearcat (talk) 20:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - looks like a BEFORE fail by not checking Proquest. There's a significant Kitchener The Record article from 2003 at ProQuest 267072703. And there's that article referenced above in Now (Now was a newspaper back then - not the current online magazine). There's also smaller reviews in major publications of various releases/events such as the Toronto Star (ProQuest 438582829, National Post ProQuest 330800197, etc. Nfitz (talk) 19:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: for discussion on sources recently presented
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

South Korea women's national under-18 softball team

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

Not finding the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG or WP:NORG. Let'srun (talk) 19:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Softball, and South Korea. Let'srun (talk) 19:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

De General

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

Aside the drug traffic of a thing. I don't see any WP:GNG on this comedian. Wikipedia is not a newspaper per the controversy to make it look like his notable. Other source are interviews and while reading further on the news I had to find out that per the content on the newspaper that he was associated with the journalist per ref2 so therefore not independent. Gabriel (……?) 18:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Nigeria. Gabriel (……?) 18:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am conscious of WP:BIGNUMBER but I see he has 5,500,000 followers on Facebook and 375,000 on YouTube so sources may exist? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nigerian skit makers are well good at buying social media engagement from third party site especially when being paid for an endorsement they try to package their life for more deals. Meanwhile all this platform also support sponsored features like promotion of page, post and all that to generate more engagement. That doesn’t still qualify WP:GNG. That is why most of this people their source come from interviews ( associating with the journalist ) which can’t be no longer independent. You can see User:Celestina007#Analysis on "Nigerian sources" to have more idea about Nigerian ways. If they were more stories like the one of the drug trafficking I would have count him as a notable per Wikipedia guideline but relying on their followers it’s a weak point. Your response are still welcomed. Gabriel (……?) 20:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
De General Did you read this? How is this an interview? If they are seeking for interview, then why was news about their drug traffick published online? All the sources are used are from reliable newspapers in Nigeria Tesleemah (talk) 20:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The comedian is notable per WP:Notable as they have independent sources, the controversy were also written in a neutral manner and I don't see a problem with that. I also added the stub template which means the article can be expanded as more sources come up. But for now, they are ok to stand on Wikipedia.Tesleemah (talk) 22:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stub article doesn’t mean they can’t be AFD. I am judging from the current situation as it is on the main space. People like De General it is only when they cause trouble they gain the newspaper attention that is why he gained one from the drug trafficking which passes independent source & significant. Aside that is there any other source you wanna provide that is independent and significant to proof notability. We can’t just call someone is notable all because they are famous. Gabriel (……?) 20:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find how they are related to the journalist here or am I missing something? If he truly want them to write for him, how come some news outlets published his negative news? Tesleemah (talk) 20:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanna know if you are missing something you can read the article from the link above I dropped earlier which directs to Celestina007. If you can provide 3 to 4 negativity then I will withdraw the AFD or any notable award won by the comedian from reliable source. Gabriel (……?) 20:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I read the article and I didn't see where all newspapers are to be condemned, rather he suggested these articles should be vetted. For the negativity I added up to 5 references under the controversy. In fact, going online now, I saw more of the news about his drug trafficking. Tesleemah (talk) 21:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable newspaper are not to be condemned. Nobody says so. Meanwhile aside the drug trafficking you haven’t said anything than that to proof notability. The subject it’s just a Too soon and you saying more future sources are coming up, who knows?. We can’t vouch for any subject progress. Except you have a close connection with the subject then a rethink will be considered. Gabriel (……?) 21:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I already declared on my userpage I don't have close relation with any of the authors I write about nor do I write on behalf of any employer or organisation. I will not appreciate being connected otherwise. Kind regards Tesleemah (talk) 22:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Mitrosz

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2008. Not clear the the subject meets WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 18:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Politicians, and Women. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Blofeld This seems to be your creation. Could you please have a look? Authority control databases kicked up some links, but I'm having trouble reading the results. Thanks for whatever input you can give. — Maile (talk) 22:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Silvia Sorina Munteanu

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2012. Not clear that it passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 17:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Romania. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maurice Starkey

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

Fails WP:GNG. The justification for the creation of the article in 2007 was that Starkey "was one of the last surviving veterans of WWI" even though he joined 8 months after the war ended. Both references (which are now permanent dead links) appear to be from his local paper and one is his obituary. I can't find anything when searching for further references except for a clipping of his wife's obit in the same paper. GPL93 (talk) 17:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Pennsylvania. GPL93 (talk) 17:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liberia at the Africa Cup of Nations

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

All sources provided are match reports. And very little, if any, of the information here cannot be found in the Liberia national football team article and the two individual AFCONs in which Liberia appeared. Anwegmann (talk) 17:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Liberia. Shellwood (talk) 17:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Need improvements, but it is a remarkable period for the Liberia national team. Also follows the same pattern as similar articles. Svartner (talk) 00:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ZWCAD

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

This software page does not comply with WP:PRODUCT. It has only routine not sustained coverage in reliable independent secondary sources. Old-AgedKid (talk) 12:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Software, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Xu, Shiqi 徐诗琪 (2020-05-28). Lin, Teng 林腾 (ed.). "【独家】租来的技术却称自主产权？中望软件的核心技术之谜" [Exclusive: Rented Technology Claimed as Proprietary? The Mystery Behind ZWSOFT's Core Technology]. Jiemian News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-09-06. Retrieved 2024-09-06.
  The article notes from Google Translate: "Based on the prospectus, Jiemian News conducted an in-depth investigation and found that ZWCAD is actually a product developed based on a third-party kernel, and the so-called "completely independent property rights" is out of the question. The reason is that ZWCAD is not only a member of these international technology agreements mentioned in the prospectus, but its core technology comes from these two international organizations called ODA and ITC. ... Therefore, ZWCAD's software can be said to be based on the core of the ODA organization and an improved product of the IntelliCAD platform software of the ITC organization. ... In 2014, Autodesk, the parent company that developed the AutoCAD software, sued ZWCAD in the Netherlands and the United States, claiming that "AutoCAD source code was stolen and improperly used in the development of ZWCAD+.""
2. van der Velden, Ruud (2014-12-23). "Dutch judge orders disclosure of source code in China". Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice. Vol. 10, no. 2. pp. 83–85. doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpu227.
  The article notes from Google Translate: "In 2002, the Chinese company ZWSoft started to bring CAD programs on the market under the name ZWCAD. ZWSoft continued to develop the ZWCAD program and brought several different versions on the market over the years. In 2012, ZWSoft brought a new CAD program on the market, ZWCAD+. When introducing this program, ZWSoft indicated that ZWCADþ would be fundamentally different from ZWCAD and that it would have developed it ‘from the ground up’. ZWCAD+ could be purchased in the Netherlands through ZWSoft’s website. Autodesk took the view that ZWCAD+ was not developed ‘from the ground up’, but instead was based on the source code of Autodesk’s AutoCAD 2008 program, and that ZWSoft infringed Autodesk’s copyrights and violated its trade secrets. ... Autodesk initiated preliminary relief proceedings before the Provisions Judge of the District Court of The Hague claiming inter alia an injunction and an order for a copy of the source code of ZWCAD+ to be provided to a custodian in the Netherlands."
3. Sava, Alexandra (2018-12-13). "ZWCAD Viewer". Softpedia. Archived from the original on 2024-09-06. Retrieved 2024-09-06.
  The review notes: "ZWCAD Viewer is an application designed to help you open and analyze or make measurements on plot drawings that you have created using various CAD software solutions. The program comes with a fresh and intuitive interface, so it is unlikely that you can have any issues loading or previewing the plots. While you can preview 2D and 3D models, the application is compatible with only a few file formats, namely DWG, DWF and DWT from versions R12 to 2013. ... In the eventuality that you are looking for a straightforward and intuitive utility that enables you to open most CAD-generated drawings and examine them minutely, then perhaps ZWCAD Viewer might come in handy."
4. Sava, Alexandra (2023-08-03). "ZWCAD". Softpedia. Archived from the original on 2024-09-06. Retrieved 2024-09-06.
  The review notes: "To sum it up, ZWCAD+ is a comprehensive software solution for your architectural needs and it can provide you with a large variety of tools. You should be aware that due to its nature, this program packs several technical functions that can be difficult to understand if you do not meet certain CAD skill requirements."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow ZWCAD to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, great job! Old-AgedKid (talk) 08:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The sources given are not significant coverage, rather, they all sound like promotional or passing coverage. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 13:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Jiemian News is a source critical of ZWCAD that says, "Based on the prospectus, Jiemian News conducted an in-depth investigation and found that ZWCAD is actually a product developed based on a third-party kernel, and the so-called "completely independent property rights" is out of the question." The Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice article discusses Autodesk's claim in a lawsuit that ZWCAD+ was based on Autodesk's source code. These sources provide significant coverage critical of ZWCAD. Softpedia provides several detailed reviews of the product that meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Product reviews. Cunard (talk) 19:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard. The sources presented don't seem promotional or passing from my look at them. The copyright dispute as well is interesting. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'd like to suggest Keep-voters avoid repeating "per someone" as it doesn't help the discussion. Old-AgedKid (talk) 08:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Old-AgedKid How so? You'd rather we just copy-paste the unrebutted sources that CUnard has provided? Aaron Liu (talk) 11:24, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Selva Erdener

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

The article uses zero independent sources with significant coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 15:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Turkey. – The Grid (talk) 16:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. Shellwood (talk) 16:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Procedural~~ keep: I'll try to find sources if I can, but for now I suggest a ~~procedural~~ keep since this is a very low-effort nomination for an opera singer whose name I can recognize. See: WP:NEXIST, WP:BEFORE TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is one source, from Hıncal Uluc's column. Many more search hits exist, but one needs to sift through them to identify SIGCOV. In edition, the SNG about musicians is likely to be satisfied here, due to concerts and records from notable firms.TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 03:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoyfulTentmaker That's not a valid argument for a procedural close per WP:PCLOSE. If you think that there is WP:SIGCOV, then by all means provide evidence of it here. That is what an WP:AFD discussion is for. Better yet, take time to improve the article. You may vote a straight keep based on policy but is there is no procedural argument to be made here.4meter4 (talk) 04:19, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was return to draftspace‎. I've left the draft creator some detailed notes on the sourcing used for the latest iteration. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Preston Corbell

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. This wa previously deleted via AFD and now, it has been recreated as a draft. I accepted it after many declined seeing that the editor wants this page badly, hence I recommend a community consensus again. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Film, Entertainment, and United States of America. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: Procedural keep. The nominator has moved the page to Main through the AFc script at 16:43 (GMT) and took it to AfD at 16:45. This is not fair. Let them redraft it, at least!!! (A lot of interviews might have the subject meet the notability requirements btw) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mushy Yank: I believe what you're trying to vote for is a draftification or something? Speedy keep, in this situation, would imply that you believe the article in its current state is fit for main space.

@SafariScribe: What's up with that? You move a draft to main space and then immediately nominate it? Why didn't you leave it? Drafts belong at WP:MFD and it wasn't appropriate to immediately accept and nominate the article. Draft space allows people to work on the article to address the issues that existed at the previous AfD discussion. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, no, I mean SpeedyKeep. I find the nomination caused disruption, especially considering the effect it must have had on the creator. I don’t think it is unfit for Main, no but I didn’t even check that hard, to be honest. I confess this is a very peculiar case. If it is moved back to Draft (the bare minimum), apologies and explanations should be presented to the creator in the first place, imv. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am willing to apologise only if we can wait for the community consensus (basically the purpose of an AFD). The draft was declined many times and there wasn't any improvement if not resubmitting by the editor. I think the advice given to them wasn't enough but conclusions from an AFD can help them realize that. I also joppose this speedy keep above. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 21:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Let me get this straight.

The draft was declined five times at AfC. Part of the issue seems to center around notability, but also that the user seems unwilling to accept that some of the sourcing is unusable per the discussions I see on their talk page. To avoid this being resubmitted you accepted this and nominated it for AfD.

AfC articles can be deleted at MfD, as that area covers the draftspace. I'm going to move this back to AfC, as per your words it does not pass NBIO. This can be nominated there for deletion, however prior to that I would recommend that you (or someone) make one last good faith attempt to let the user know why the sources are not usable and why it currently fails notability guidelines. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed the point@SafariScribe: WHY did you accept the page then? To punish the page creator?? To be able to take it to AfD??!!!! Oh, dear. To teach them a lesson and make a point? That's a very wrong way to use your tools as reviewer. I don't think you should apologise because the page might be considered notable, for example, no, not at all. I think you should apologise for accepting the page and then taking it to AfD immediately. That is emotionally very disturbing for someone who, as you say, has been waiting for the moment when their page would be accepted for so long. And of course, you would oppose a speedy keep: you nominated the page to deletion!!! there is no need to mention it! I, on the other hand, stand by my !vote. This is not the way things should be handled and this is in my view disruptive: you basically moved a page into the Main just to prove it is non-notable and should be deleted, disturbing greatly, I suppose, the creator of the page by this puzzling sequence of events. This is plainly and totally absurd and wrong, I am sorry. This is NOT what AfDs are for. And Drafts should not be discussed at AfDs. Please kindly withdraw this while it is still time, and explain your point to the creator, even if that means redrafting the page. Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: nomination withdrawn. Should be draftified. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ReaderofthePack, you may now close and delete this discussion. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The page has been draftified in the meantime. (And please do not try to close this as Kept. Rather Moot. I think the administrator who did the move should have done the close, but hey.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Pokhara Avengers

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

Non notable cricket team. IP editors keep turning the redirect back into article, so AFD to get consensus is only way to prevent this. I do not mind the redirect being restored so long as it is protected (to prevent re-creation by IPs or other users reverting the redirect again). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Cricket, and Nepal. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: NPL hasn't even begun yet; until it gets enough notability should remain as a redirect. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 16:02, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: This team already participated in the Nepal T20 League and have many coverage article about it yet, redirect until tournament and others team announced and have enough coverage to pass notability.Godknowme1 (talk) 02:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nadezhda Petrenko

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

Tagged for unclear sourcing since 2014, but in reality there never heave been any sources as the external links are all You Tube videos of subject singing. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 15:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Ukraine. – The Grid (talk) 16:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1952 Leningrad mid-air collision

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

per WP:GNG failure to site verifiable sources and lack of secondary sources, as shown before, the soviet union was incredibly secretive and tight lipped about tragedies, especially aviation tragedies, that took place in the soviet union. Lolzer3k 15:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and Russia. Lolzer3k 15:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:N. This article is based primarily on what appears on the airdisaster.ru website, which was briefly discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_446#airdisaster.ru a couple of months ago and generally found to be an unreliable source. I've spent some time trying to find even a brief mention of this accident in reliable sources, and have failed. While Wikipedia's notability guideline is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the current state of sourcing in an article, the policy does state that information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article. I'll also mention that I'm not very comfortable with the fact that the article was created August 13, 2024, yet the citations to the airdisaster.ru website are citing an access date of April 12, 2013. This may be a machine translation of the ru.wikipedia page that does not appropriately give attribution to the original article per WP:HOWTRANS. RecycledPixels (talk) 18:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maika Ceres

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

Article is written from unreliable, non-independent, or self-published sources like blogs, social media, press releases, etc. Not clear the subject passes WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 15:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Uruguay. Shellwood (talk) 15:20, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blagica Pop Tomova

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

Article is based entirely on the website of the subject's employer. Not clear that the topic passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and North Macedonia. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apocalypse: From Us

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

Fails WP:NALBUM. Redirect was reverted DonaldD23 talk to me 14:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Korea, and South Korea. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dreamcatcher (group): found no additional coverage. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 20:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darya Dadvar

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

Tagged for notability since 2019. Relies largely on self published sources. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 14:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Iran. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yasheel Aukhojee

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

Appears to be largely promo for the business. Sources are interviews or profiles of the company. He's a doctor that does at-home visits, which is rather routine. I find nothing in news or other searches that would help us prove notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Mauritius. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elena Pankratova

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

Article is largely built from the website's of the subjects employers and therefore they lack independence. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Russia. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:09, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Emer

AfDs for this article:

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

1. It was moved from draft space to article space before it was reviewed and made live by the creator of the page

2. It was moved to draft space by other editors due to promotional tone, it seemed as it was written by someone closely connected to the subject

3. It was proposed for deletion and the final decision was to keep. However, the keep voters: 1 was a new account created just for this debate only (seems like it and it was an open IP, one was an editor banned for sock-puppetry)

4. There is someone constantly removing a section that is a bit negative about the subject

All this makes me believe that this page is being managed by someone closely connected to the subject. Additionally, i don't believe the subject is notable and most of the references are PRs and he is constantly self-promoting on the internet. WikiProCreate (talk) 13:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Appears to be a celebrity plastic surgeon [35], [36], [37]. I'm not sure any of these show notability. Discussion in AfD last time was also questioning the Academic notability, noting that 1000 citations was rather low for his field. I don't see that much has changed since the last AfD. Oaktree b (talk) 14:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: He's been investigated by a few regulatory bodies [38], which doesn't affect notability. This information has been added/removed, suggesting this page is being actively curated by editors, likely for promo purposes. Oaktree b (talk) 15:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Medicine, and United States of America. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, California, Illinois, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Irina Mataeva

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

Article is written like a resume and based on sources connected to the subject. Not clear the article passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Russia. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SuperBot Entertainment

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

Doesn't appear to be pass notability. Perhaps merging with PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale, I am unsure where "iPad storybook app" CUDDLEFISH FRIENDS could be mentioned. IgelRM (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and California. IgelRM (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect/merge with PlayStation All-Stars as their only notable game. Does not appear standalone notable, and seems to have been made by a single-purpose account. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal Police women's volleyball team

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

What little coverage there is in reliable sources is WP:ROUTINE. TarnishedPath^talk 13:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Volleyball, and Nepal. TarnishedPath^talk 13:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May i know to concrete reason why this page is nominated for the deletion?. Nepal Police Club currently competing in Central Asian Club Volleyball Championship and many people are searching about the club. I think it's more than enough to have page for the club. NiseEdits (talk) 14:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A popular subject ("many people are searching about the club") doesn't establish notability - independent, reliable sources do. LR.127 (talk) 18:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Police. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Club-level volleyball in any nation (outside Argentina, Brazil, Europe or former Eastern Bloc nations) generally doesn't meet notability. Nate • (chatter) 23:20, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arcline Investment Management

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Refs are routine business news. scope_creep^Talk 12:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, and Tennessee. – The Grid (talk) 13:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hassan & Roshaan

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

It was created by a newbie WikiProCreate (talk · contribs) and seemed PROMO, even though it had inline references. I draftified it so it could go through the AFC process, but the creator reverted the draftification. So, I have no choice but to nominate it for deletion. The page relies on GENREL sources and those from WP:NEWSORGINDIA and it clearly fails both GNG and WP:BAND. I also suspect it might be UPE! — Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and cleanup if necessary. Refs for Ms Marvel and teaming up with Shae Gill would tend to indicate notability to me. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- SarekOfVulcan, Does the policy state that collaborating with other artists alone qualifies someone for a WP article? Isn’t it necessary to meet either GNG or NBAND to passes WP:N? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Hassan & Roshaan are popular locally. Notability does not mean that a subject is covered globally. Local notability and noteworthiness are important. Additionally, their tracks and the band itself got nominated and was awarded by Lux Style Awards which is one of Pakistan's most prominent awards in the entertainment industry, this agrees with WP:GNG.. The subjects have been covered by Dawn News, Fuschia Magazine, and even on BBC's Asian network. If the grounds are that it the draft was moved to main-space, it was done after more references were added and part of content was altered based on the reviewer's feedback. The note mentioned moving the draft back to article space once it has been improved and it was done after changes were made. This band lies in the same category as other Pakistani singers/bands such as Young Stunners, Shamoon Ismail, Abdul Hannan. But only their track was included in an international franchise, Ms. Marvel (miniseries). Of course, changes can be made to improve it, but deleting it on unproven claims or UPE is unfair. There are more than 20 references added with in-line citations--and they are not syndicated coverage.

WikiProCreate (talk) 13:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: WikiProCreate (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

WikiProCreate, I've this simple question. On what criteria do you think it passes NBAND? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.
Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, such as a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications). (Ms. Marvel (mini-series and their song became an OST for a TV serial at ARY Digital)
Won Lux Style Awards

WikiProCreate (talk) 13:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. But I don't see it that way. Most of the sources are either unreliable or fall under NEWSORGINDIA. There is some coverage, but it is too promotional to be considered sufficient for GNG.
2. Please provide evidence to support your second point
3. I also don’t see evidence that they won Lux Style Awards; they were only nominated. Even if they had won, it wouldn’t be sufficient, as it is not considered a major music award according to NBAND.. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Admin Liz already warned Saqib here [39] that WP:NEWSORGINDIA does'nt belong to countries other than India and not to use this as a justification for deletion in future nominations but still he is using this in AFD's related to Pakistan. Article clearly meets notability criteria Forbes, The Express Tribune, DAWN The Express Tribune. Also the user who nominated this page is on a spree to draftify new Pakistani articles whether they meet notability criteria or not. One can confirm this by checking his history. 117.102.55.117 (talk) 16:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC) — 117.102.55.117 (talk · contribs) has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and this XFD page. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, WP:PROMO and aggressive socking. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it's promotional, but there are enough sources in there that at least appear to be possibly-reliable that they might sufficiently meet GNG. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SarekOfVulcan, At first glance, the article appears well-sourced, but a deeper look reveals that the sources are either unreliable or fall under NEWSORGINDIA, which means the band doesn’t easily meet the GNG. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Terminus Group

AfDs for this article:

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

Not actually notable as explained by Patriot0239 and Jumpytoo in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Terminus_Group. The last deletion discussion turns out to be disturbed by several sockpuppets[40][41]. 虹易 (talk) 12:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. 虹易 (talk) 12:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher N. Harding

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. No indication of signifiance. References are profiles, promo websites, passing mentions, raw search urls and interviews. This is for a WP:BLP as well. scope_creep^Talk 12:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Sports, and Kentucky. – The Grid (talk) 13:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhav Singh

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:BIO. Whole article is made up of profiles. No indication of significance. Awards are non-notable trade awards. scope_creep^Talk 11:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and United Kingdom. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Dennehy

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

Non-notable amateur sports person. In terms of WP:SPORTBASIC, the only coverage I can find is the stuff that I've added to the article. Most of which is not independent (like "listings" on personnel sheets of orgs with which the subject has a connection like these: [42][43][44]; Which, even if they were independent, are far from in-depth coverage). Or ROTM "match report" type passing mentions (like these: [45] [46]). In terms of WP:GNG, we barely have enough sources to establish even the sub-stub that we have. And certainly insufficient sources to expand any biographical information (DOB, place of birth, education, etc). A search in Irish news sources returns little to nothing. In the Irish Independent family of regional/national papers for example, all I can find are these two trivial passing mentions. Similar searches, in news sources like the Irish Examiner or Irish Times or RTE.ie, return nothing at all. Nothing. Not even trivial passing mentions. Notability is not established. Guliolopez (talk) 11:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC) Guliolopez (talk) 11:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 11:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 11:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stacey Peak

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

Non-notable 9/11 victim's memorial page. Wikipedia is not a memorial. Fails WP:BLP1E. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 10:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Indiana, Kentucky, New York, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and redirect (as article creator) per WP:REDIRECT. While the article probably fails BLP1E, which I take full responsibility for, a redirect to List of victims of the September 11 attacks (O–Z) is better than nothing, where information on the subject still does exist. Sir MemeGod  12:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Very much a non-notable individual, routine office work. Wiki is not a memorial and this person isn't more or less notable than the hundreds of others that passed away that day. There is no coverage about this person to be found. Oaktree b (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep - I have no problem keeping this. As for the oft-quoted policy of Wikipedia not being a memorial ... we sure seem to bend the other direction at times: List of Texian survivors of the Battle of the Alamo and List of Alamo defenders, etc. etc. Most of the people on those lists are only notable for that one battle. Wikipedia is often a memorial of one subject matter or another. — Maile (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your argument. Is your argument that WP:BLP1E doesn't apply here? We can point to lots of WP:OTHERSTUFF, but it doesn't override policy. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*::It wasn't an argument - I'm OK keeping this as is, per Sir MemeGod above. No opinion of whether or not to redirect it. The rest of my comment was just a general passing comment that Wikipedia sometimes varies in how things are applied, etc. — Maile (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused here. SirMemeGod wants to redirect the article and admits it fails BLP1E. There is no "Keep per Sir Memegod" because the argument is one that argues for redirecting. Could you clarify your position a bit? Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 00:27, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy delete‎. WP:G5 as a creation of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Balakashyap. asilvering (talk) 18:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baidwan sept of Jat-Sikh lineage

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

WP:TNT. Needs a complete rewrite, new title probably, better sources (I doubt the "Geospatial PDF map of the compilation of GIS data for the mineral industries and related infrastructure of Africa" has much to say about the subject). Draftification was met with hostility and claims of vandalism, so AfD it is. Fram (talk) 10:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sikhism, Haryana, and Punjab. Fram (talk) 10:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

List of Major League Baseball career double plays as an outfielder leaders

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

Tagged for notability over three months ago with no sourcing improvements since then. The article's references consist of an MLB rulebook which is a primary source and baseball-reference.com which is a stats database; neither count towards notability. At present, this article topic fails WP:NLIST, which requires in-depth significant coverage from independent reliable secondary sources that collate and discuss this list topic's entries together as a group or set to establish notability. A WP:BEFORE search came up empty; hence, delete. Left guide (talk) 10:29, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, Baseball, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Similar discussion at [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Major League Baseball career double plays as a right fielder leaders]. Also, this is covered by Baseball Almanac and I'd imagine baseball-reference though I haven't seen a direct source. Conyo14 (talk) 03:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Conyo14: Are those sources secondary and WP:SIGCOV for this topic though? Mere statistical database entries don't count towards notability; the sources need to provide fleshed out prose and context directly about this list topic. Left guide (talk) 05:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not advocating for a !keep. Just merely pointing out the references that are to be pointed here. Baseball Almanac is considered reliable and covers the statistical aspect. Beyond that, I'd say each record is likely to house some WP:SIGCOV from the player article. However, the grouping may not suffice for deletion. Conyo14 (talk) 06:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Conyo14: Well can you please provide more specific usable links (the Baseball Almanac link you supplied comes up as an error without rendering anything meaningful) or quotes of the source material so they can be judged and examined by the community? I'm afraid your argument is WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES as of the present moment. Notability is demonstrated via evidence of sufficient source material, not the belief or assertion of such. WP:Articles for deletion/List of NBA career ejections leaders is a current example of evidence-based WP:NLIST notability being demonstrated in a similar context (sports stats list). Left guide (talk) 07:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Michaeletos

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

Fails WP:NACTOR. Has only appeared in one film. Samuel Wiki (talk) 09:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Samuel Wiki (talk) 09:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Panam (brand)

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

Current state of sourcing and WP Before doesn't help to establish notability per WP ORG or NCORP. Promotion only J. P. Fridrich (talk) 07:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The company meets notability. The four references used are via reliable sources and provide extensive coverage specifically about Panam. A PROQUEST WP:BEFORE search of "Panam shoes Mexico" turned up 102 results. JSFarman (talk) 16:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
none of the 100 plus results meet NCORP criteria for reliable in-depth independent coverage. Passing mentions and routine only 2A02:85F:9A06:7C28:8C9F:F432:2C6D:64B7 (talk) 12:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are not passing. San Diego Union Tribune , Telediario Mazatlan Post , Austria, Xóchitl. 2018. “Él Hizo ‘Cool’ a Los Tenis Ochenteros.” Entrepreneur Mexico 26 (10): 52–56. (4 pages) (Via EBSCO). A brief result via Google books refers to Panam as "hugely popular the '80s, though their ubiquity dropped off after..." The company was founded in 1962. Look offline and online via Google Mexico. Pinging the editor who created this article, LeDeroider, as they have expertise in this area -- 26 sneaker/shoe articles, two of which have been deleted -- and can likely add more references. JSFarman (talk) 16:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Juliana

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

Bit part actor. Lots of social media driven puff piece, clickbait and paid placement article but fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 14:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, Medicine, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:ENT. Xegma(talk) 17:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xegma: How does the subject pass WP:ENT exactly?— Preceding unsigned comment added by scope creep (talk • contribs)

They have worked in multiple films and television shows. Xegma(talk) 04:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to IMDB she has had a series of minor parts. No leading parts in any series or film. So currently fails WP:NACTOR. scope_creep^Talk 14:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP: ACTOR requires significant roles, but not necessarily lead roles. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:16, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even in "Naan Sirithal" she is right down at the bottom of the cast list. I cant see how she is notable. Coverage is a PR. scope_creep^Talk 14:06, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That particular role is certainly not a lead but could be considered significant. See plot Summary. (If ImDb cannot be used to establish notability, I don’t think it is fair to use it to establish non-notability) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Long established consensus states must be a lead role. On your comment about non-notabilty, you can't have both sides of the coin. This is where notability is proved, the final arbiter. If you have sources, post them up instead of relying on non-arguments outside consensus that doesn't add anything to the argument. scope_creep^Talk 10:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Long established consensus states must be a lead role. No, that is simply not true. SIGNIFICANT, not necessarily lead (or change the guideline). As for the rest, no comment; thank you.. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Very much a non-notable actor, with bit parts. Nothing showing she's had a starring role in any project, which is the bare minimum needed for notability,. Articles are simply confirmation of presence in various film/television projects. Oaktree b (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrej Nguyen

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

Does not pass WP:GNG. He does not have a single start in a professional football competition and the sources used do not document his notability in any way. Maybe speedy deletion per A7 is possible. FromCzech (talk) 05:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 05:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – He's actually quite well-known in Vietnam, due to his call up to the Vietnam national under-23 football team. There are a lot of articles about him in Vietnamese, which I believe do pass the WP:GNG. But as you mentioned, he did not have a single game in a professional football competition, and also no appearance for Vietnam youth national teams. I see this article as WP:TOOSOON . I think a draft is the best solution. Lâm (talk) 06:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like a single call-up to the U23 preliminary squad will make you famous in Vietnam? LOL. A draft is a reasonable option. FromCzech (talk) 06:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, his case is particular. He was one the first Vietnamese diaspora player playing abroad to get a call up to the national youth team. That explains why he got a lot of attention of the media Lâm (talk) 10:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thplam2004: Could you link here to some of the biggest articles about him? That can help editors decide his notability. --SuperJew (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article from Tiền Phong covered completely his family background, his career and his journey to get called up Vietnam U23 team. There are so many articles covering the player such as 2 , 3 , 4 and many more. In fact he was called up to the Vietnam national team in September 2023 but he withdrew the call up (source) Lâm (talk) 04:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—Fails WP:GNG without enough of a career to assume the existence of WP:SIGCOV. Anwegmann (talk) 18:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the sources Thplam2004 just mentioned?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Irondequoit stabbing and arson attack

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

Not notable event per WP:EVENTCRIT and looks like a violation of WP:NOTNEWSPAPER Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and New York. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Four deaths in a stabbing attack is very much routine these days, sadly. Nothing to suggest this is anything beyond routine news coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A suspect, an illegal immigrant from the Dominican Republic says it all; another article from the crime/alarmism part of en.wiki that insists every little crime deserves an article to go with their agenda. Stop it, this is a local news story and the creator knows what they're doing tossing in Fox News and New York Post sources and mis-using a sister station connection (WHAM to KEYE) to try to game GNG. Nate • (chatter) 19:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EDGE of Existence programme

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

I noticed while editing the following article, that the two overlap significantly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EDGE_species. I propose housing the EDGE methodology and the programme under one article. Oignonne (talk) 09:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Environment, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge EDGE species to EDGE of Existence programme: Not enough material to warrant two articles, but neither fails GNG. Narrower topic should be merged into the broader topic. UtherSRG (talk) 10:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ramsey Faragher

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

No evidence of notability besides a few academic sources, doesn't appear to meet WP:ACADEMIC or WP:GNG - *maybe* you can argue that the company is relevant? But he as a person doesn't seem to be Toffeenix (talk) 09:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, Technology, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Symbhav

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

Fails the WP:NEVENTS, a particular annual event of a law college Pinakpani (talk) 09:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Pinakpani (talk) 09:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melissa Carper

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

No significant independent coverage, failure to meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for musicians. Also, the use of IMDb website tells us a lot. Old-AgedKid (talk) 08:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Nebraska. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Getting a song into one episode of a TV show was a nice break, but building an article around that one achievement violates WP:BLP1E. Otherwise she gets occasional softball interviews in specialist magazines (e.g. [47]) but she seems to be a local/regional musician with little reliable media coverage. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

C. K. Durga

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

Promotion with "sources" like X or Facebook; I doubt the page meets GNG and BIO requirements. Old-AgedKid (talk) 08:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Medicine, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Los Angeles Organizing Committee for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games

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

Fails WP:NCORP, article is essentially just a list of people so nothing to merge. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Olympics. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems to be the standard style for OOC articles and the GNG is passed, and of course it's four years off so right now it's all planning and no actual events have occurred. Nate • (chatter) 23:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't even see GNG being met. Traumnovelle (talk) 23:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OCW Women's Championship

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

No notable pro wrestling title. Just an independent title with a few references, not proving notability. The main promotion hasn't an article. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International Practice Management Association

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

Refs fail WP:SIRS and so fails WP:NORG. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. UtherSRG (talk) 11:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Washington, D.C.. Shellwood (talk) 13:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a mere 3 google news hits, unusually low for a US based organization. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kay-Anlog, Calamba

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

Fails notability WP:GEOLAND, Barangays are not considered being notable. Please see here the similar deletion (which is converted the redirect), for more details. TentingZones1 (talk) 08:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Philippines. TentingZones1 (talk) 08:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. HueMan1 (talk) 21:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, part of an AFD nomination, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barandal, so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduja Tech

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

Does not meet NCORP, no reliable sources; superficial and WP Trivial media coverage only J. P. Fridrich (talk) 07:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Engineering, Technology, Transportation, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

S. J. Dahlstrom

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

Not notable writer, doesn't pass WP ANYbio and other guidelines. J. P. Fridrich (talk) 07:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I created the article because I believe the subject passes WP:NAUTHOR due to the awards. Also worth saying is that the nominator of this discussion only had 11 edits before nominating this article, all of them made on a single day in 2022. Badbluebus (talk) 16:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty Mary Sunshine

AfDs for this article:

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources, only mentions. None of the links in the article are reliable sources. toweli (talk) 10:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Washington. toweli (talk) 10:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV need more independent reliable sources. Xegma(talk) 17:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Note that they survived an earlier AfD way back in 2006, when music notability requirements were far more lenient than they are now. As a pre-Internet band, they can be found in books on Seattle grunge history, but only very briefly in lists of opening acts or as the former band for someone who later joined a different band (e.g. [48]). Otherwise I can find no significant and reliable coverage of their career or pro reviews of their one album. They got a few breaks for being present in a hot local scene, but gained very little notice of their own. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duong Thanh Tung

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

Does not pass WP:GNG. He does not have a single start in a professional football competition and the sources used do not document his notability. Maybe speedy deletion per A7 is possible. FromCzech (talk) 05:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think for this player does pass WP:GNG with all the articles in Vietnam's big football journals about him. He recently signed a pro contract with a club in Vietnam's highest division, and is registred in the squad for the league. His pro debut will only be a matter of time. Lâm (talk) 10:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote, the sources used do not document his notability. Wiki is not a player database and a few possible starts for a professional club won't change anything about that. This player has not accomplished anything yet, and we are not predicting from a crystal ball whether he will ever accomplish anything. The page can be created in a few years, when he has dozens of starts, and it will be written about something other than his first pro contract. FromCzech (talk) 11:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Vietnam, and Czech Republic. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete—Appears to fail WP:GNG, although there is certainly a career that may be documented and/or documentable. Anwegmann (talk) 18:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The article has some sources in Vietnamese, have they been checked? Svartner (talk) 23:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article from Bóng Đá Plus provides a significant coverage about the player, detailing his family background, career, and playing style. Additionally, there's also the article from Dân Việt that also gives a resume of his career and his playing style.It's worth noting that the player recently signed with the runners-up of the previous season in Vietnam's top football division. This significant move, in my opinion, justifies why a player from low-tier Czech teams deserves a Wikipedia article. Lâm (talk) 13:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SPORTSPERSON: Meeting this requirement alone does not indicate notability. WP:SUSTAINED: There have been reports of him entering professional football, but that's not enough as he may not make it. I would recommend to draftify the page and consider renewing the article in a year, in two, depending on career development and other media reports. FromCzech (talk) 13:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify - As proposed by @FromCzech sounds the better solution. Svartner (talk) 03:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - Looks like he could hit GNG eventually but not quite there. Chris1834 Talk 19:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As suggested above as well, I would be okay with draftification. Anwegmann (talk) 01:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Melbourne Land Forces Expo protests

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:EVENT. The event is not notable enough outside of Israel–Hamas war protests. Coverage of the protest has been WP:ROUTINE, similar to any other protest that has occurred in Melbourne. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police, Politics, Israel, Palestine, and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the coverage of this specific event, in my view, goes beyond what’s outlined in WP:ROUTINE as well as beyond what can be described as “similar to any other protest that has occurred in Melbourne”. There’s been loads of mainstream media coverage, both national and international^[1], in the weeks and days leading up^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]^[7]^[8]^[9], during the days of protest itself^[10]^[11]^[12]^[13]^[14]^[15]^[16]^[17]^[18]^[19]^[20]^[21]^[22] with all sides chiming in/being quoted with their perspectives, and even in the days following^[23], coverage of these protests is still trickling in. In short, there’s pages and pages of coverage, news articles, interviews with mainstream media outlets, etc. This isn’t just once off circumstantial coverage - it’s been sustained and consistent. Geelongite (talk) 08:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GMH Melbourne: procedural query, did you mean to nominate this twice? Other AfD here — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 08:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ClaudineChionh: Hello, No I didn't mean to, my internet cut out halfway between twinkle processing the AfD and the popup box said to process it again. Should I close the first one? GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GMH Melbourne: thought it might have been a computer hiccup. I think it's best to close the other one as there isn't any discussion there yet. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 08:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: coverage of the protests was hardly routine - live coverage throughout the events, multiple heated responses from politicians and other public figures, significant debate over the role played by police. Also consider the fact that coverage was unusually extensive even in the days and weeks prior to the event. It has significance then beyond the fact that it was a protest about Palestine but also as regards questions of civil liberties and politics in Melbourne and Australia.

These protests were compared in multiple sources to the S11 protests which have had an article of similar length on Wikipedia since 2004. That article mentions the use of pepper spray against protesters, pointing out that at the time this was unheard of and supposedly banned. The use of rubber bullets and other weaponry by Victoria Police against anti-war protesters is similarly unprecedented today and I think another indication of notability. All that is solid melts into air (talk) 10:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article could certainly do with some expansion to provide a more complete picture, but I think it demonstrably has received significant coverage in reliable sources. The fact that the prime minister saw fit to respond certainly makes it stand out from other, more routine protests. --Grnrchst (talk) 11:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

Comment: I would not be opposed to a move to Israel–Hamas war protests in the Australia. Similar to Israel–Hamas war protests in the United States. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was closed due to technical difficulties‎. A new discussion is located at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Melbourne Land Forces Expo protests (2nd nomination). (non-admin closure) GMH Melbourne (talk) 08:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Melbourne Land Forces Expo protests

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

Fails WP:EVENT. The event is not notable enough outside of Israel–Hamas war protests. Coverage of the protest has been WP:ROUTINE, similar to any other protest that has occurred in Melbourne. GMH Melbourne (talk) 06:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police, Politics, Israel, Palestine, and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 06:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Connall Ewan

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

I am unable to find enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. I found some routine transactional announcements (1, 2, 3) and interviews (1, 2, 3), but nothing approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 06:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Scotland. JTtheOG (talk) 06:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:24, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:29, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hana Jonášová

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2012. Not clear that the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 05:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Czech Republic. Shellwood (talk) 10:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not seem to pass the notability criteria. AntEgo (talk) 15:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Etonkids International Educational Group

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

Rejected PROD. A really odd source was added after the article was dePRODded; an individual author is credited, but it reads like a press release. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and China. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No significant independent coverage to be found, fails WP:NORG:

the SCMP article[=https://www.scmp.com/article/650729/kindergarten-appeals-staff] is a recruiting notice masquerading as a news article. Based on the author's history [49] including a lot of recent advertorial stuff, this could be a situation where she was doing paid placement but SCMP wasn't always disclosing what it was doing. I'm just speculating but there's nothing in the article that suggests anything other than parroting their hiring needs and requirements.
the Sina article[50] seems to be reporting on a press conference they held to announce their name change, and lacks evidence of independent editorial judgment. This was added by @Cunard who is a wizard at finding buried sources for China-related articles, but we sometimes disagree about quality. In any event this would just be one article.

Aside from that, the only independent thing I could find was this that name-checks them. Oblivy (talk) 06:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. "China Pre-school Education (Kindergarten) Industry Research Report, 2014" (PDF). ResearchInChina. November 2014. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  The abstract of the research report notes:
  10.1 Etonkids Educational Group
  10.1.1 Profile
  10.1.2 Methodology and Academic Programs
  10.1.3 Regional Distribution of Kindergartens
  10.1.4 Teacher Allocation
  10.1.5 Charge (Taking Beijing as an Example)
2. Zhao, Yuchu 赵妤初 (2022-09-06). "【教育有料】伊顿国际教育更名伊顿善育集团学而思网校推出国际象棋课" [[Educational News] Eton International Education Renamed to Eton Education Group; Xueersi Online School Launches Chess Courses"] (in Chinese). Sina Corporation. Archived from the original on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  From Google Translate: "According to reports, Eaton has established nearly 60 kindergartens in 18 cities across the country, with more than 13,000 students, more than 3,000 faculty and staff, and has served more than 150,000 families. ... Specifically, under the strategic layout of diversified businesses, Eaton focuses on three major areas: family scientific parenting and family early development industry, infant and toddler care industry, and vocational education industry. ... Today, Eton has developed into a diversified business group with childcare, early education, kindergartens, camps, vocational education, family education and other sectors."
3. Otremba, Jolene (2008-08-30). "Kindergarten appeals for staff". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2024-09-17. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
  The article notes: "If teaching young children brings a smile to your face, then perhaps working for a fast-expanding mainland kindergarten will be an appealing career move. Etonkids International School, an international bilingual kindergarten, is about to open six more schools for its autumn 2008 school year and is in urgent need of passionate employees. Headquartered in Beijing, the school has branches in Tianjin, Nanjing and Shanghai, and will open more schools in these locations."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Etonkids International Educational Group to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 06:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We had an edit clash - you can see above about my assessment of #2 and #3. I think paid research reports are narrow-cast, industry publications that fail WP:AUD. Also, sometimes I think they are portrayed as having lots of content so people will buy them. Oblivy (talk) 06:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not consider research reports to fail WP:AUD. Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Publicly traded corporations says regarding public corporations, "However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. Examples of such sources include independent press coverage and analyst reports."

Analyst reports are "narrow-cast, industry publications" just like the ResearchInChina research report. Cunard (talk) 06:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Analyst reports on a public company, say, GM or Microsoft which might be of interest to many people. That's a different situation than an industry sector report which are targeted at selling just a handful of copies at a high price. We can't see how much material there is (for sure more than other schools, but it's a bit of a pig-in-a-poke) or where they got it from. Oblivy (talk) 06:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Since editors consider the earlier sources insufficient to establish notability, I did a more exhaustive search for print sources. These are sources that cannot be found in a Google search. It takes a lot more time to do this exhaustive search, so I usually do the Google search approach first. Here are the sources I found:
1. Kong, Yue 孔悦 (2012-12-24). "蒙氏理论教育未来" [Montessori Theory Education Future]. The Beijing News (in Chinese). p. D21.
  The article is about how The Beijing News gave Etonkids the "Most Trusted Private Primary and Secondary School Brand" award (Chinese: 我最信赖的民办中小幼品牌).
  The article notes: "伊顿双语幼儿园成立十年以来，依据自身特色，逐渐在家长中间形成了良好的口碑，赢得了家长的信赖。伊顿双语幼儿园秉承正统的蒙台梭利教育理念，构成一套完整的幼儿园双语教育课程，使孩子们在不以牺牲母语为代价的同时真正扎实地掌握中英两种语言。他们还注重孩子们个人能力的培养。对于1.5至3岁的幼儿，课程重点在于培养孩子们的语言学习、阅读方面的基本技能和幼儿智力、数学、音乐、美术、科学、自然等兴趣的启蒙。"
  From Google Translate: "Since its establishment ten years ago, Eton Bilingual Kindergarten has gradually formed a good reputation among parents based on its own characteristics and won the trust of parents. Eton Bilingual Kindergarten adheres to the orthodox Montessori education concept and has formed a complete set of kindergarten bilingual education courses, so that children can truly master both Chinese and English without sacrificing their mother tongue. They also focus on the cultivation of children's personal abilities. For children aged 1.5 to 3, the course focuses on cultivating children's basic skills in language learning and reading and the enlightenment of children's intelligence, mathematics, music, art, science, nature and other interests."
2. Mao, Rui 毛瑞 (2012-11-02). "锦绣天下伊顿国际幼儿园落户锦绣华庭认筹"1万抵3万"" [Eton International Kindergarten settled in Jinxiu Tianxia, Jinxiu Huating's pre-sale "10,000 against 30,000"]. 三峡晚报 [Three Gorges Evening News] (in Chinese). p. A27.
  The article notes: "10月28日，著名的伊顿国际教育集团与葛洲坝地产锦绣天下项目签署合作协议，宜昌伊顿幼儿园明年将落户锦绣天下。签约仪式吸引了近400名锦绣天下业主参加，他们对伊顿入驻锦绣天下十分欢迎。伊顿国际教育集团是最早致力于幼儿早期教育的专业机构，目前已经在新加坡、印度、中国、韩国、日本、马来西亚等国家开设了58所国际学校和幼儿园，拥有5000多名来自全世界61个国家的学生。"
  From Google Translate: "On 28 October, the famous Eton International Education Group signed a cooperation agreement with Gezhouba Real Estate Jinxiu Tianxia project, and Yichang Eton Kindergarten will settle in Jinxiu Tianxia next year. The signing ceremony attracted nearly 400 Jinxiu Tianxia owners to participate, and they welcomed Eton's entry into Jinxiu Tianxia. Eton International Education Group is the earliest professional institution dedicated to early childhood education. It has currently opened 58 international schools and kindergartens in Singapore, India, China, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia and other countries, with more than 5,000 students from 61 countries around the world."
3. Guo, Guozhong 过国忠 (2011-08-29). "伊顿慧乐探索中国幼儿启蒙教育新模式" [Eton Hui Le explores a new model of early childhood education in China]. Science and Technology Daily (in Chinese). p. 7.
  The article notes: "由伊顿国际教育集团在无锡新区投资建设的伊顿慧乐双语幼儿园，8月20日开园。首批100多名幼儿将在这里开始接受与过去传统教育完全不同的启蒙教育。据了解，伊顿国际教育集团是由美国哈佛大学、美国西北大学凯洛格商学院校友会成员以及美国蒙台梭利的教育专家们联合举办的。"
  From Google Translate: "Eton Hui Le Bilingual Kindergarten, invested and built by Eton International Education Group in Wuxi New District, opened on 20 August. The first batch of more than 100 children will begin to receive an early childhood education that is completely different from the traditional education in the past. It is understood that Eton International Education Group is jointly organized by members of the alumni association of Harvard University and Kellogg School of Management of Northwestern University in the United States and Montessori education experts in the United States."
4. Hou, Chunlian 侯春莲 (2012-06-08). "蒙台梭利教学法让孩子爱上学习" [Montessori teaching method makes children fall in love with learning]. Science and Technology Daily (in Chinese). p. 4.
  The article notes: "据介绍，伊顿幼教是目前中国本土第一个同时获得国际蒙台梭利教师认证委员会和美国蒙台梭利协会认证的学院，也是同时提供0—3岁和3—6岁中英文国际认证的国际蒙台梭利教师培训学院。"
  From Google Translate: "According to reports, Eton Preschool is currently the first college in China to be certified by both the International Montessori Teacher Certification Committee and the American Montessori Association. It is also an international Montessori teacher training college that provides both 0-3 years old and 3-6 years old Chinese and English international certification."
5. Zhang, Jinna 张金娜; Luo, Shalin 罗莎琳; Li, Dongyuan 李东元 (2011-07-22). "学校增多规模增大"足不出洲"读名校" [The number of schools has increased and their scale has increased. You can study in famous schools without leaving the island.]. Information Times (in Chinese). p. D2.
  The article notes: "伊顿双语幼儿园是美国蒙台梭利协会AMS在华唯一双子会员机构，全国十佳办学单位，为1.5~6岁的孩子提供在一流的双语教学环境下纯正的蒙特梭利课程。幼儿园实施由伊顿教育机构自己研制的英文、中文课程。在优质的教育服务确保孩子们全面发展的同时，使孩子获取流利的双语能力，让孩子赢在起跑线上。"
  From Google Translate: "Eton Bilingual Kindergarten is the only twin member institution of the American Montessori Society AMS in China, one of the top ten schools in the country, providing children aged 1.5 to 6 with a pure Montessori curriculum in a first-class bilingual teaching environment. The kindergarten implements English and Chinese courses developed by Eton Education Institution itself. While high-quality educational services ensure the all-round development of children, they also enable them to acquire fluent bilingual skills, giving them a head start."
6. Fu, Xueying 傅雪婴 (2013-05-30). "小小舞台" [Small stage]. Wuhan Evening News [zh] (in Chinese). p. 47 宝贝计划·宝贝俱乐部.
  The article notes: "台下的家长们一个个脸上笑开了花。这是武汉伊顿慧智幼儿园第一次在园外举行大型儿童汇演。舞蹈喜刷刷、爵士舞、英文歌曲串烧……整个汇演有20多个节目，来自3个园区的260名孩子都参与了演出。... 该连锁幼儿园来汉两年多，采取混班制，0-3岁一个年级，3-6岁一个年级，因此许多参加表演的孩子还都只有2岁多。"
  From Google Translate: "The parents in the audience were all smiling. This is the first time that Wuhan Eaton Huizhi Kindergarten has held a large-scale children's performance outside the kindergarten. Dance, jazz dance, English song medley... The whole performance has more than 20 programs, and 260 children from 3 parks have participated in the performance. ... The chain kindergarten has been in Wuhan for more than two years and adopts a mixed class system, with one grade for 0-3 years old and another grade for 3-6 years old. Therefore, many children participating in the performance are only over 2 years old."
7. Additional sources that are either not significant coverage, non-independent, or unreliable:
  1. An article in the unreliable source Global Times titled Etonkids denies 'atrocities'.
  2. Koh, Aaron; Li, Ziqi (2021-12-22). "'Start-up' capital: cultivating the elite child in an elite international kindergarten in Shenzhen, China". Oxford Review of Education. 48 (2). doi:10.1080/03054985.2021.2013188.
    The article discusses Etonkids in a four sentences. The article notes: "The names of some of these elite international kindergartens are telling; for example, the Beanstalk Bilingual International Kindergarten and Etonkids Bilingual International Kindergarten. These two elite international kindergartens are established and international players in the sector who have pricing leverage (Businesswire, Citation2021). The tuition fees for Beanstalk Bilingual International Kindergarten, for example, are RMB180,000 (equivalent to USD27,792) per academic year while Etonkids Bilingual International Kindergarten’s tuition fees range from RMB 135,000 – RMB138,000 (equivalent to USD20,844 – USD21,307). ... Awarded by the Chinese Association of Educators and China Association of Private Educators, it was one of the top ten brands of private kindergarten in China in 2001, in the same rung as Beanstalk and Etonkids."
  3. "A Montessori movement: Vivien Wang '99 is building one of the leading early education programs in China" (PDF). Kellogg. Vol. 20, no. 2. Northwestern University. Summer 2013. p. 24. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-07-12. Retrieved 2024-09-17.
    The article notes: "As managing director of Etonkids International Educational Group, a bilingual Montessori school she founded in Beijing, Vivien Wang ’99 leads one of China’s top early childhood educational providers. ... In 2002, with the backing of Sequoia Capital, Wang set about establishing Etonkids, a Montessori school for children ages 18 months to 6 years old. The school focuses on The Etonkids’ Three C’s: creativity, character and culture. Different programs and levels of English immersion cater to expatriate families, local families and a mix of the two family types. To assure quality, Wang refuses to franchise and established Etonkids Montessori Teacher Training Academy, the only indigenous American Montessori Society-affiliated teaching credential program."
Cunard (talk) 08:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1 - Beijing News[51] - this comes from an educational awards special supplement. It's bylined. There's an "acceptance speech" at the top but the rest of the article could be independent. It's all very praise-ful, but this one is weakly SIGCOV.
2. Three Gorges News - a property development got Eton to establish preschool in the development, but the mention of the school is really brief and probably from promotional materials they provided. No evidence of independent analysis, and it's not very long.
3. Science and Technology Daily - I couldn't access. The words "据了解" could mean they talked to someone from the school, or that they are doing independent research. It's just hard for me to tell.
4. Information Times -- seems regurgitated from the school (it's a vibe thing)
5. Wuhan Evening News - again, couldn't access but this seems like a report on an event involving the kids. It's actually kind of charming but it's still not a lot of content. So again weakly SIGCOV.
For the remaining, surprisingly I think #2 isn't a bad source - yes, they are getting information from the school but I think this is earned media rather than just regurgitation because Oxford Review has to put it into a common format. #1, yeah, good old Global Times reported online rumors about Etonkids; - that they picked the school as a target actually seems to support notability, but it won't go anywhere becauase it's a perennial bad source. #3 - no, this is from a person associated with the school.
So, on my reading, we have:
- zero in the article (per above),
- not changing my view on the research report especially since nobody on-wiki has read it
- three weak significant coverage (Beijing News, Wuhan Evening News, Oxford)
At the moment I'm keeping my vote at delete. But I will consider and would encourage editors to consider whether there are good reasons not to be too hard on the sourcing.
And as always, well done @Cunard. Even trying to find your sources online is hard for me, and I always appreciate seeing what you come up with. Oblivy (talk) 13:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kathleen de la Peña McCook

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

This article does not pass WP:GNG and contains BLP issues. There is no significant coverage in independent, secondary sources. It relies entirely on primary sources, and very scant ones at that. ~ HAL333 05:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Museums and libraries, Politics, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NPROF. The distinguished university professorship likely passes WP:NPROF C5, even at a regional university. And I think the Lippincott award is probably a pass of NPROF C2. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The University of South Florida is a top-level public university (an R1 university), not merely regional. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. She also meets WP:AUTHOR, as her published books appear to be quite significant in the field; one of them has gone to several editions, and has been fairly widely reviewed (e.g., in The Library Quarterly, Progressive Librarian, and Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association). No doubt her other books are also reviewed in various places; here and here are reviews of her A Place at the Table, for instance. I'm not sure I see the BLP issues. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep through WP:PROF#C5, #C2, and WP:AUTHOR, as above. The Distinguished University Professorship was removed from the article by the nominator before nominating. Per WP:AGF, I have to assume that this was through the nominator's failure to understand the WP:PROF notability criteria (which explicitly allow primary sourcing for this sort of claim) rather than to obscure the subject's notability. Regardless, I think this apparent incompetence (and the failure to address WP:PROF in the nomination) is enough to justify WP:SK3. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Agree with C2, C5 of WP:NPROF and WP:AUTHOR, any one of which would be plenty. Qflib (talk) 19:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep and suggestion that the nominator withdraw the nomination. I completely agree that NProf#C2 and C5 as well as AUTHOR have all easily been met. LadyofShalott 00:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The nominator is correct, sadly, in saying that secondary sourcing is completely missing. This could easily be solved by someone typing in her name in JSTOR to add a bunch of reviews of her (many) books, which is sure to be there. But that she is notable via PROF is clear. User:HAL333, please take User:LadyofShalott's advice and withdraw. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep per above, passes NPROF, particularly as several editors are actively improving the sources. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pobé Mengao attack

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

WP:News article, I'm unable to find WP:SUSTAINED coverage Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Terrorism and Africa. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to either the place it occurred Pobe-Mengao Department in a history section or Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso#2019. The place is a better target imo but a mention should be added to the other PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merge and, if so, a decision on an appropriate target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of storms named Hugo

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

PROD undone by author. WP:NLIST not met here. Did a search and could only find Hurricane Hugo as the main topic. Although it is a WP:SETINDEX, it is still required to meet the notability requirements of a WP:STANDALONE. Conyo14 (talk) 05:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as author. Harmless storm index article. It seems that the nominator isn't at all familiar with these types of pages (and I've created numerous SIA's). The name Hugo has been used in more than one basin, so the name perfectly qualifies for a storm index article; and there's a strong possibility that it gets re-used in the future since it has been included in the list of names for the 2024–25 European windstorm season. No valid reasons for deletion. CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International Association for Greek Philosophy

AfDs for this article:

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

Unreferenced article created by an editor banned for copyright. The first page of results failed to provide any useful coverage. WP:TNT also applies given the potential this is a copyright violation. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:29, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Philosophy. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:29, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Delete -- generally suspicious of "International X of Y" and look at the possibility of fraud etc., but Googling I was able to confirm that it is a society whose conferences etc. extend back into the 1990s (before predatory/faux academic conferences were generally a think we needed to look out for). Serious academics have presented there (https://www.lib.uci.edu/library/publications/philosophy/santas.html) and there is plenty of evidence that meetings have existed from back then (https://orb.binghamton.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1219&context=sagp) -- from all this, it doesn't take too much citation of importance to show that this association (or at least its conferences) should be notable. (I have a low bar for academic societies w/ more than 25 years of conferences). Somehow though, despite all that, I cannot find evidence the society has made notable contributions to the field that would justify meeting GNG or a subject-specific notability guideline. I'm saying Soft Delete, because I wouldn't be surprised that someone (from Greece or w/ better paper archive access) could find evidence of the society's notability, and if that happens after the article is deleted, I would not hold this AfD (or at least my delete vote) against recreating the article w/ more evidence.
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Greece. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isabelle Poulenard

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2019. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 04:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and France. Shellwood (talk) 10:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaëlle Méchaly

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2019. Not clear the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 04:02, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Working on this now - I have located some reliable sources which I will continue to add as I expand the page.Chaiten1 (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated with references. Selected recordings listed, rather than a comprehensive catalogue.Chaiten1 (talk) 22:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing per WP:HEY. @ Chaiten1 Thank you for the much improved article. Best.4meter4 (talk) 05:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Chaiten1 (talk) 06:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benares brass

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

"Benares brass" isn't a thing; it's just brass items made/sold in Varanasi. Just like there isn't a page for "Benares trinkets", there doesn't need to be one for Benares brass. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Contested PROD (I opposed it).

I would agree that 'Benares brass' isn't a thing. At least, not in the metallurgical sense, as a particular brass alloy. I may be wrong - place-specific alloys do sometimes turn up, owing to oddities of local material supply.

But I'm not convinced that 'brass and brasswork of Benares' isn't a thing, just based on the sources already attached to the article. Is brass manufacture a significant and distinctive industry specific to Benares? Now that's certainly a thing, and there are many such locations where particular forms of metalworking are both distinct (the place is significant to the craft of brassworking) and locally economically important (brass working is significant to the place). On my own doorstep, an article on 17th to 19th century brassworking around Bristol and the Avon valley would be very welcome. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EyeCarePro

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

I'm not seeing much evidence of WP:CORPDEPTH KH-1 (talk) 03:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. KH-1 (talk) 03:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising, Medicine, Internet, Canada, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a while since I've looked at this topic. All things considered, before I research the topic any further, perhaps changing it to a stub article would be a better move than deletion. I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 06:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was keep‎. I understand the original close and the factors that led there. The sources identified, depth discussed and subsequent discussion lead to the significant coverage required to retain this. Improvement may be needed, but there's sufficient sourcing with which to do so. Star Mississippi 12:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1940–41 Primera Fuerza season

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

Only very minimal content inside the article and has no inline citations. The one and only source ([52]) is by the RSSSF, which collects statistics of every football result. Due to it lacking coverage in sources, it fails WP:GNG. Azarctic (talk) 01:40, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Mexico. Azarctic (talk) 01:40, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am curious why you picked this season page out of all of them from 1902-03 to 1942-43. Technically there is nothing wrong with the article, it shows a historical table of what was then called an amateur league. However I believe the league did have good coverage in Mexican media. There maybe room for improvement, but in it's current form, I would combined all the league tables into one or maybe two articles. But historically, this league is part of the history of football in Mexico. So... also, how much WP:BEFORE did you do? I guess the coverage would be different in the 1940s due to WW2 and the political situation, so my bet is it's all about the offline sources anyway. Govvy (talk) 09:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These tables are irrelevant anyway. It can’t be that significant if it’s getting 19 views per month either. All these seasonal articles should really be redirected to Primera Fuerza or deleted because there is barely anything in them in terms on content, which is why I picked this one because it has less content than the others, as well as barely any coverage. Azarctic (talk) 11:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:14, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Primera Fuerza - possible search term. Giant Snowman 19:16, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Direct predecessor of the current Liga MX, there is a lack of sources but the notability exists. Svartner (talk) 11:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In addition, the article in Spanish has literary sources on the history of Mexican football that seem credible to validate the information. Svartner (talk) 11:57, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. A review of sources, and those in the Spanish-language article, would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:13, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - just to be clear, deleting this article would also confer deleting every single "Primera Fuerza" season from 1902 to 1943. Paul Vaurie (talk) 23:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as this division is notable, and so are its seasons— important to note that it was the highest-level division in the country. Impossible for me to review and search all the Spanish-language offline sources, but the existence of sources such as Crónica del fútbol mexicano: Por amor a la camiseta and Historia General del Fútbol Mexicano and their usage as sources on the Spanish-language article suggest that they have material related to this specific season and the other seasons of this competition as well. Overall, it does us no good deleting this as it's clearly the highest level for football back then in Mexico, sets a bad precedent for football seasons in other countries too. The only reason this would be deleted is because it's hard to find offline sources, to dissect them, and to use them on Wikipedia. Which would be a shame. Paul Vaurie (talk) 23:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And from experience, the RSSSF tends to be highly reliable for the tables of these older competitions. Svartner (talk) 18:10, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I see No consensus yet. I'll just add that we don't judge notability based on how many views an article gets per month but by whether reliable sources can demonstrate SIGCOV.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:48, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - obviously notable. Article should be improved. No one would propose deleting a 1940s England Division 3 table; nominations like this baffle me. Nfitz (talk) 14:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I closed this discussion as a Redirect but several editors have challenged the closure (which I will post below this relisting) so I have reverted my closure and given the discussion a final relist and will have another closer review this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was my original closure of this discussion The result was redirect‎ to Primera Fuerza. Closing this as a Redirect as an ATD. Despite this AFD being open for 3 weeks, editors have failed to add a single reliable source to the article under discussion or bring one into this discussion so I can not close this as Keep. I encouraged editors to review sources in the Spanish language article but that didn't happen either. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The three additional sources in the Spanish language version of this article at es:Liga Mayor 1940-41.^[1]^[2]^[3] Two of them are offline (though I haven't dug deeply); but the third (a 286-page book discussing the first 110 years of Mexican football) can be reviewed at https://archive.org/details/oncedcadasdeftbo0000ramr. Aspects of the season are discussed in Chapter 9, particularly starting at page 77. Some of the references and bibliography at es:Campeonato de Primera Fuerza de la FMF/Liga Mayor#Bibliografía may also be relevant.

^ Galindo Zárate, Jesús (December 2007). Historia General del Fútbol Mexicano (Primera ed.). México: Francisco J. Camargo. pp. 84–85.
^ Calderón Cardoso, Carlos (July 1998). Crónica del fútbol mexicano: Por amor a la camiseta (Primera ed.). México: Clío.
^ Ramírez, Carlos F. (June 2010). 11 décadas de fútbol mexicano (Primera ed.). México: Octavio Antonio Colmenares y Vargas.

Nfitz (talk) 05:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was ‎ keep, withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Paul (scholar)

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

No notability within the criterium of academic. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 03:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 03:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WITHDRAWN DUE TO PAST DISCUSSION Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 03:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Donald MacMillan (rugby union)

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

No sources, and seems to have no real notability. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 02:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Known as "Ian" rather than Donald, which may assist your searches. Plenty of coverage on Trove and I've added some of them to the page. Got more results for the typo "Mc"Millan.[53] Jevansen (talk) 23:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be helpful to have a review of the new content additions. Also, please do not move an article that is the subject of an AFD discussion during the AFD. It confuses our editing tool, XFDcloser which doesn't understand why the article is at a different name.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Was not aware of this. Jevansen (talk) Jevansen (talk) 07:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vector TDx

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

Got reviews from IGN and PocketGamer, everything else is an unreliable source or trivial mention. Attempts to find significant coverage in magazines failed. Doesn't seem to pass the notability threshold for a new article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Could not find more sources about this game. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to indicate it clearly that I'm undecided on whether the article should be deleted due to the sources I've listed below. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think this might get there. Small review from The Guardian [54]. My read of WP:SALON.COM is that it's borderline as a source. ~ A412 ^talk! 15:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's fairly small, so I won't immediately withdraw the nomination, though I do admit that it might push people to "weak keep". Now I essentially have no opinion about whether it should get deleted or not. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dug through the web and found few more sources: Four more passing mentions on IGN, JayIsGames (twice), Four more passing mentions on Kotaku, and a few more articles on PocketGamer (1, 2, 3, 4). Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: An assessment of newly found sources would be helpful to a closer.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flash Element TD as a predecessor could be a WP:ATD. IgelRM (talk) 20:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Italy women's national under-18 softball team

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

Unable to find any coverage to meet the WP:NORG or WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 01:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Softball, and Italy. Let'srun (talk) 01:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 09:54, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already nominated at AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Singapore women's junior national softball team) so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete entirely based on primary sources. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Basem Al-Shayeb

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

I believe that the above article is a blatant example of self-promotion, and does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements for articles about people. The article heavily references the accolades and accomplishments of this person, seemingly for no other reason than to make them sound impressive, but their listed accomplishments and scientific contributions, though interesting on their own merits, are frankly not very noteworthy against the backdrop of the molecular biology field. They obtained a PhD from UC Berkeley, got their dissertation work published in some high-profile journals, and co-founded a startup- so what? This is not a singular accomplishment; this person did not discover anything that significantly advanced the field, and to the extent that they did, they did not do so alone. There are many other individuals like them out there for which we do not - and should not - have articles.

Furthermore, the article shows every sign of having been written by either the subject themself or someone close to them, with the intent of misrepresenting their accomplishments for self-aggrandizing purposes; to wit:

1. The article as originally written named the subject as the founder of the listed company; they were a co-founder.

2. The article as originally written stated that the subject "led the discovery of" the various listed topics; they were co-first author on two of the papers and a first author on one, and moreover all of this work was evidently done during their PhD, meaning that their graduate advisor technically "led" the work in question.

3. Following my attempts to correct these misstatements, at least two single-purpose accounts were created which proceeded to revert these changes and call into question my motives in editing. I have little doubt one or both of these accounts belongs to the subject of the article.

I am aware that my actions here may be interpreted as implying some ulterior motive, but I assure you I have none: I simply do not look favorably upon people who abuse Wikipedia for self-aggrandizement and self-promotion, especially (as in this case) while being verifiably dishonest, and I am acting accordingly. Xardwen (talk) 00:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Science, Technology, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully disagree. Wiki analytics indicate that the page has been visited 7130 times, with 13 average visits per day this year. There is significant coverage in reliable third-party sources that are independent of the subject. This suggests some noteworthiness, even if you personally think it undeserved. A quick search also yields further attributions that are not present in the article, including references in two 2024 books: Superconvergence How the Genetics, Biotech, and AI Revolutions Will Transform Our Lives, Work, and World By Jamie Metzl, and The Nobel Prizes 2020 By Karl Grandin.

It appears that the original edits that you mentioned, Xardwen, had deleted relevant news sources. They also included unsourced information, a copyrighted photo and a LinkedIn profile which are all against WP and the edits were addressed by seasoned wikipedians accordingly. It is inappropriate to insert unsourced personal opinions or skepticisms into an article. Your statements also seem to repeatedly violate both WP:AFG Assume Good Faith and WP:PA No Personal Attacks principles with potentially libelous phrases against a public figure?

Considering your edit warring and your statement of being in the same field and in the same city as the subject, can you explain what precisely is your role or personal and financial relation to the subject for COI purposes? You mentioned strong opinions on biographies, but you have not edited any other biography apart this one. In fact, aside pages on erectile dysfunction, this is the top page you have edited. I have no tie to this topic but I hold strongly that Wikipedia is an open-source encyclopedia, not a weapon to undermine persons, nor to push a particular view or to serve a personal vendetta. Pantrail (talk) 23:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your semantic first author comment, you are enforcing a biased personal opinion in contradiction with referenced sources, which state a leading role. A first author in biological sciences is typically the person who led the work on a day-to-day basis and is considered to have made the most substantial contributions to the overall research. In cases of co-first authorship, all co-first authors are considered to have "led" the work. Your edit was inaccurate because you removed this detail in your stated effort to undermine the subject Pantrail (talk) 00:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to preface the following by saying again that I would very much like a senior editor to weigh in on this matter; I believe an experienced and impartial voice is sorely needed here. That being said:

The Wikipedia guidelines on notability state the basic criteria as follows: people are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

The secondary sources cited in the article are as follows: The Independent, GEN - Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News, Chemical Engineering News, CRISPR Medicine, Forbes, Arab America, ScienceAlert, IFLScience, SYFY Official Site, TechCrunch, Berkeley News, The Daily Californian, and the Innovative Genomics Institute website (apologies if I have missed any sources). Of these, I would say that only the first four qualify as reliable and intellectually independent of one another and the subject; the subject was listed in Forbes and Arab America's "30 under 30" lists and thus calling these sources "independent" is questionable, and the last three listed sources are affiliated with the institution where the subject did their doctoral research. ScienceAlert is described as controversial and sensationalistic in its Wikipedia article; IFLScience is described as similarly unreliable in the article on its founder; TechCrunch seems fairly reliable based on this analysis by Ad Fontes Media; SYFY is an entertainment company and should not be regarded as reliable when it comes to science reporting, though the subject's mention by them does speak to the extent of their publicity. Indeed, if their work had not been (rather sensationalistically, in some cases) reported by multiple media outlets, and were I not also a researcher in the subject's field, then I would never have heard of them to begin with. I assure you that were I to learn of another researcher in my field with a Wikipedia page that I felt was unwarranted, I would respond exactly as I have here; this was simply the first such example I have come across.

I would like to briefly interject here that I have never stated that I live in the same city as the subject. I am not sure how this misconception arose. I also do not believe that I am obligated to reveal any information about myself beyond what I already have, and I will decline to do so if asked. I have said previously that I have no personal or financial relation to the subject, and that is all I have to say on the matter.

Regarding my other interests as indicated by my edit history, I do not see how this is relevant, but I appreciate you taking the time to look through my prior contributions - I hope that you found them interesting and informative. I cannot help but notice, however, that you have engaged with exactly no articles aside from the one under discussion, and that your account did not exist prior to last month. The same is true for Xerxescience, who has behaved in a more-or-less identical manner. I find this to be extremely suspect.

Regarding your statements about co-first authorship: yes, it is true that co-first authors on a scientific publication are both regarded as having "led" the work described, but regardless, I think it is unfair and misleading not to explicitly give both individuals equal credit in an article that describes their work. Likewise regarding being a co-founder of a company- yes, a co-founder is obviously considered a founder, but listing them simply as "founder" gives an inaccurate impression of their role in the company's history- and, not incidentally, makes the referenced individual sound more impressive, which seems to be a throughline of almost every aspect of this article as it was initially written.

To the extent that my actions have violated Wikipedia's rules: granted, and I aim to do better to avoid running afoul of them in future. I believe that my criticisms and concerns are valid even if I have crossed some lines, or had a bit too much fun at Mr. Al-Shayeb's expense. As I've said above, I would much prefer if someone else was doing this work instead of me- and yet here we are. Xardwen (talk) 00:31, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to weigh in as an independent observer, as the flag to remove this article caught my eye. I think this article inflates the significance of its subject. There are thousands of people who recently graduated with PhDs from top universities with papers in top journals each year, yet most of these people do not have Wikipedia articles written about themselves. The wording of the first paragraph reads as an advertisement for Amber Bio. The second included information about the individual being a peer reviewer, which is a non-noteworthy duty that nearly every academic scientist fulfills.The studies called out in the third paragraph were made possible only through the hard work of a large team of fellow students, postdocs, and even Prof. Banfield herself. Given the other co-authors' (including Prof. Banfield's) documented roles in the work, I think the term "led" to describe this individual's involvement is disingenuous. Additionally, there are 600 people located in North America who are added to the Forbes "30 Under 30" list annually (30 people across 20 industries); I think Wikipedia call-outs of achievements should be saved for actually meaningful and highly selective awards. I respectfully disagree that the subject of this article represents a "public figure."

I call on Wikipedia leadership to investigate whether the multiple accounts that created and have been editing this article in a disingenuous/advertising way represent "sock puppets" of the same person. If proven to trace back to the same person, then every indicted account should be banned for violating Wikipedia's policies. I think it is in the best interest of the Wikipedia community to stop self promotion and industrial advertisement on its platform. Hemelina (talk) 07:27, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This has become quite ridiculous. The content of the page cannot be based on subjective opinion of a user, or terminology they think should be used, but rather the information in the sources. Xardwen has now added the same unsourced information and libelous material multiple times, and subjective synthesis of information. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid, and not your blog. Sources cannot be removed based on your subjective opinion of whether information is important, or how "scientific" a source is, or your biased opinion on noteworthiness of the subject's work. And I say it is biased because Xardwen has already engaged in forum shopping and has accused me of COI, and was thusly already resolved by administrators for being baseless. Meanwhile, he states he in the subject's "field" and the address associated with his account links to the San Francisco metropolitan area, in particular Berkeley. It is abundantly clear that he is somehow linked to the subject and has been obsessively editing the page to harass and malign them, which he has expressed himself "with savage delight". Hemelina is also a brand new account that is likely Xardwen's sockpuppet to further target this page, having just been created to install the same baseless claims and remove information. Xerxescience (talk) 04:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, well. Whoopsies. Regardless, I have no personal or financial connection to the subject, though I don't expect anyone to believe me. I have no idea who User:Hemelina is, either. I have opened a "Request for Comment" on the article's Talk page; I hope that this matter will shortly be moved into the hands of more experienced editors.Xardwen (talk) 04:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xardwen you have yet again inserted original synthesis of your own subjective opinions into the page, replacing the language that was presented in the source articles, and violating Wikipedia:No original research after multiple warnings. I will also note the interesting presentation of the same typos as User:Hemelina. Xerxescience (talk) 04:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting this discussion. I'm not sure how to say this politely, but Wikipedia doesn't care about your personal opinion of an article subject and whether or not you believe they "deserve" an article on this project. None of your opinions are based in Wikipedia policy which, along with consensus, is how AFD discussions are closed. In this case, the standards for notability is WP:NACADEMIC and comments should be made in reference to whether or not this subject can be considered notable by this standard or, less likely, WP:GNG. Notability isn't determined based on editors' opinion, much less accusations against your fellow editors, but based on reliable, independent, secondary sources that provide SIGCOV. Some analysis of sources was done here and I thank you for that start. Those who disagree with the nominator's proposal would spend their time more productively by addressing their evaluation of sources or by finding better ones. It is also clear that none of you have participated in an AFD discussion because it helps the closer if you, except for the nominator, cast a bolded "vote" like Keep or Delete or Redirect. Assessing consensus isn't a vote count but some times when editors post long comments, like in this AFD, a bolded vote makes it obvious what outcome you want to happen. Here's hoping we get some participation from AFD regulars who could also offer a source assessment. Thank you.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High Commission of Togo, London

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

Fails WP:ORG. 1 of the 2 sources is its own website, the other is the UK foreign ministry. LibStar (talk) 00:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Africa, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 00:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy redirect to List of diplomatic missions in London#Embassies and High Commissions in London per the outcome of literally every other prod and AfD about embassies and high commissions in London that has been closed after redirection was suggested, and a trout for the nominator for wasting community time by continuing to AfD plausible search terms with a very clear target. Thryduulf (talk) 09:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some people suggest other targets like bilateral relations articles. There is no such thing as "speedy redirect". Never heard that in my 17 years on WP. I would have prodded this but one editor complained they need to go to AfD. LibStar (talk) 09:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing you say will discourage me from nominating embassy articles for deletion. LibStar (talk) 10:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds WP:POINTY. Thryduulf (talk) 10:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's hardly a response to my reasons for nominating for deletion. Do you acknowledge there are in fact more than 1 possible target if redirected. Do you acknowledge that "speedy keep" is only used by you and not a community accepted start for a vote? LibStar (talk) 10:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the biggest time wasters are those who created these embassy articles as stubs and questionable notability. At least one of these editors is now permanently banned. LibStar (talk) 11:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're discussing what should happen with one article out of 6+ million articles on the project. We typically have 70-100 AFD nomination proposals every day. Let's all be CIVIL and not get personal here. We want participation in each AFD in order to come to the clearest understanding of consensus and disputes between editors tends to drive away editors unless they want to join in on the dispute and those are the editors who we don't want here. The focus is the article, not the discussion participants. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:24, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Black Fragility

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

This article covers a definition of a term used by one person, it does not appear to be a broader subject of academic discussion. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This term doesn't appear exclusive to Loury. McWhorter uses it (here, here), and Steele uses it in a very different context. Regardless, I'm not finding coverage of the concept itself, to the extent it exists, or evidence that it's a unified concept among the scholars who have deployed it. I also don't see an appropriate redirect to White fragility since the article does not currently use the term in discussing McWhorter's criticism of DiAngelo. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The term has been the subject of academic papers 1 2, at least one book written by a social scientist 3, and some articles like this one 4. Cortador (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of Cortador's sources, the first two papers (by Steele) are actually the same paper published in two different venues (one a journal, one a book chapter, still the same article). Apart from the headline, the term "black fragility" does not appear once in the paper's text. The book written by Carter, the "social scientist," is self-published. (The author appears to be a corporate trainer/consultant.) The article by Gobodo-Madikizela has a single reference in it to "black fragility": "What concerns me is the trap of black fragility, when the reaction to the behaviour of racists is interpreted as if the particular racist actually is in a position of power in relation to the person who is the target of the racist slur." Thus, Steele and Gobodo-Madizkizela do not constitute WP:SIGCOV and Carter's work is not a reliable source under WP:SPS. Thus, none of these sources contribute to a WP:GNG pass for this concept. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per Cortador. KatoKungLee (talk) 00:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not even close. First of all, the article is a wild failure of WP:NFCC, comprising mostly a three-paragraph quote (!). This is not the Manhattan Institute website, so we should not be hosting entire articles based nothing on that think tank's publication. Even if there were all the sources in the world about this subject, it's still a complete WP:TNT case. But it's also not notable, as far as I can tell. As per Dclemens1971's analysis above, we have exactly one independent reliable source. The question is where to redirect it. I'd recommend redirecting to White Fragility and adding a line there about some critics using "black fragility" (which would, of course, mean omitting most of the sourcing identified in favor of those which explicitly talk about DiAngelo). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flora Plumb

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

Fails WP:NACTOR with no major credits. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and United States of America. CptViraj (talk) 00:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: her career as theater actress and educator seems rather notable and her contributions to TV series/film might be seen as prolific. I haven’t searched for better sources so this is a weak keep. Would a redirect to the Personal life section in the article about her sister be an acceptable ATD? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre, Education, and California. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rebuttal. "Prolific"? Single TV episodes in about 20 shows and 6th billing in a film nobody's heard of denote a journeyperson actor. And being a high school teacher doesn't make her a notable educator. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:51, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"a film nobody's heard of".....Except the critic from the LAT, for example. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, practically nobody's heard of. In any case, not a major film, and NACTOR asks for multiple notable films. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete In searching newspapers I find her named in places like TV listings. These attest to the fact that she appeared on the named TV shows but those short sentences or two are about the plot and her character, not about her. These could be useful in recreating her career if there were also 2 or more substantial articles about her and in reliable sources. This I do not find. The sources given here are two short obits, an article saying that she won a student award (not notable), and a paragraph in a newspaper naming some roles she had in minor productions. I don't find anything longer than a paragraph, and nothing in major news sources. I can't find that she won a major award. I'll swing back by to check on progress, if there is any. Lamona (talk) 02:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kimeshan Naidoo

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

This somewhat promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Despite being a WP:REFBOMB, none of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV in secondary, independent, reliable sources. They are limited to WP:INTERVIEWS, WP:PRSOURCEs, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. His awards are the kind of "30 under 30" cruft not encompassed by the WP:ANYBIO award criterion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and South Africa. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay @Dclemens1971, fair enough - thank you for your thorough reasoning and looking into it.

I was the original writer who put the article together based on my research on the subject. I'm a new editor so I'm still learning the wikipedia requirements. I also added more sources after your initial deletion request, but this is a good lesson in what sources are valid for me.

I would suggest we turn the page back to a redirect like it originally was before I wrote the article. It was a redirect to the Unibuddy page. Informedpanda (talk) 21:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would accept restoration of the redirect as an outcome here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I restored it to a redirect but you reverted saying this discussion has to close.

So I will let you handle the process going forward as I'm not familiar with it. Informedpanda (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, once an AfD is open, it has to be closed by a non-involved editor. This will happen in less than a week and since both participants support redirect I expect that will be the outcome. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Dclemens1971, this discussion could probably close faster if you provided a link to the preferred redirect target article. Yes, I know it's buried in the page history but if you identified it, then a closer would probably take care of this discusion sooner. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz the other editor already mentioned it upthread. Unibuddy Dclemens1971 (talk) 08:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saheb Bhattacharya

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

No significant coverages. Xegma(talk) 17:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and West Bengal. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR, with multiple significant roles in notable productions. The article needs cleanup. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it fulfils WP:NACTOR, but the page should be enriched by more sources. Pinakpani (talk) 07:05, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Very busy actor, well known and notable. scope_creep^Talk 13:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR multiple notable films played as main actor Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 00:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

T-Bag (Prison Break)

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

Fails WP:GNG not very much WP:SIGCOV mainly just routine episode coverage Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are a number of reliable sources which talk about this character, displaying significant real world coverage.
Merge or weak keep. The current article state has too much WP:UNDUE plot and could be cut down to fit in the LoC no problem (most other main characters don't have standalone articles either). On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if there are enough sources to turn this topic into a Good Article, so it needn't stay merged forever. – sgeureka ^t•c 12:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- ETA: And there is a Prison Break character with GA status (that I don't even remember from watching the show): Alexander Mahone. – sgeureka ^t•c 12:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Sgeureka. I have my doubts about the sources, but a merge is a good WP:ATD, and allows it to be improved. (And potentially split even if I do not see evidence of it yet.) Shooterwalker (talk) 02:13, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 01:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OpenVera

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

Non-notable product, doesn't satisfy WP:GNG. Tule-hog (talk) 01:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Tule-hog (talk) 02:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Google News yield only 1 result. Fails WP:GNG per WP:SIGCOV Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 00:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil women's national under-18 softball team

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

Subject lacks the needed coverage from reliable secondary sources to meet the WP:NORG/WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 01:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Softball, and Brazil. Let'srun (talk) 01:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – There is no Brazil women's under-18 team, only under-20 and under-17. Svartner (talk) 14:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JEDA Technologies

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

Non-notable company, doesn't satisfy WP:GNG. Tule-hog (talk) 01:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Tule-hog (talk) 02:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dale Wood (William Lawrence Hansen)

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

There are no secondary sources that provide information about this person; the entire article is based on primary sources and the article itself admits that little is known outside of government copyright documentation. As a result of the lack of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources, the subject of the article fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Music. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As Bill Hansen, he is in the credits as an editor for a variety of television programs and related media that may become Wikipedia articles in the future. Most of all, he has composed music with a variety of notable composers. The other references can likely be found, as requested in the first banner. Starlighsky

Future notability is not a consideration at AfD. And his notability cannot be WP:INHERITED from other composers he may have worked with, or from projects he may have worked on that may (or more likely may not) be notable. What we need is reliable, secondary sources. Can you provide those?? Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will do my best to find those. Starlighsky (talk) 03:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Film, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Griffin Tomas

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

I am unable to find enough in-depth coverage of this soccer player in independent sources to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 01:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Connecticut. JTtheOG (talk) 01:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

a quick little google search will tell you that he's played in two usl championship matches. omg i hate stupid people like you... -Soccerfan10001 — Preceding undated comment added 03:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please be WP:CIVIL. Also, playing in USL Championship matches has no relevance to WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Li Dong-woon

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Redirect to 1966 World Cup squad. Simione001 (talk) 00:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:39, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 September 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 1966 FIFA World Cup squads#North Korea as possible search term. Giant Snowman 18:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect – Per above. Svartner (talk) 00:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Husam Hourani

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - To 1984 AFC Asian Cup squads#Syria

Lâm (talk) 18:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. He played at two tournaments, so which do we redirect to??? Giant Snowman 18:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per Giant Snowman. Svartner (talk) 00:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No WP:SIGCOV Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 00:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yang Song-guk

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Redirect to 1966 World Cup squad. Simione001 (talk) 00:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the film The Game of Their Lives and it has sigcov on him. I kept a notebook with the content discussing him that I'll have to find. I believe one scene had a player saying something like 'here's [North Korean] newspaper headlines I kept on all of our players' – so it's clear that the players (especially the significant ones like Yang) had sigcov. Let me draftify and I'll turn it into something good. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify per above. Just realized from this that documentaries can count as sigcov, thanks! May be able to write some articles based on subjects covered in documentaries. seefooddiet (talk) 12:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - played at the World Cup, Olympics, and managed the national team?! Clearly notable. Giant Snowman 18:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – Due to the lack of sources, the tendency is for it to be deleted, but in fact this seems to be one of the most relevant players in North Korea. Svartner (talk) 00:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Kyong-il (footballer, born 1970)

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - To 1992 AFC Asian Cup squads#North Korea

Lâm (talk) 05:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. Giant Snowman 18:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Jong-min (footballer, born 1947)

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 00:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete also lack of WP:SIGCOV. Xegma(talk) 17:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - played at the Olympics and managed the national team, clearly notable - needs improving, not deleting. Giant Snowman 20:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Improve per GiantSnowman. Hansen Sebastian (Talk) 18:33, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reminding participants that WP:GNG has not been addressed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CPC and World Political Parties Summit

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

This one-off video conference fails WP:EVENTCRITERIA. No WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and no indication of WP:LASTING effect whatsoever. Amigao (talk) 00:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The ideas of "No continued coverage" or "no lasting effect" is readily shown to be wrong by the second source, a 2023 academic book discussing the topic over multiple pages. In addition, we currently have multi-language coverage. "Video conference" should not suggest unimportance given the scope and period - event included 500 political parties and 10,000 individual representatives and was conducted in 2021 when China was still quite protective on COVID19 matters. JArthur1984 (talk) 00:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I'm not sure how notable the book source cited is, as it's not an online reference. I can bring up news coverage of the event in 2021. Sourcing is largely in academic journals, into 2023 at least [55], where it's discussed as part of China's larger influence in the world. Oaktree b (talk) 01:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for spotting. We should incorporate more journal articles.

Current book academic source I referred to is from the notable Suisheng Zhao and published by Stanford University Press JArthur1984 (talk) 12:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/09/11/australia/anti-war-protesters-clash-police-australia-intl-hnk

[2] ttps://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/good-for-our-economy-vic-premier-spruiks-benefits-of-land-forces-expo-to-melbourne-as-she-issues-stern-message-to-protesters/news-story/ca519b16ae3f76e831cf496d39ffb1d9?amp&nk=ec02638979b700359840bbc02fea4526-1726559897

[3] ttps://7news.com.au/news/huge-protest-expected-at-land-forces-expo-at-melbourne-exhibition-and-convention-centre-c-15992509.amp

[4] ttps://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/army-of-protesters-to-cause-chaos-ahead-of-weapons-expo/news-story/25d424b4046e0db12096a8e36fdd43f2?amp

[5] ttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/sep/10/melbourne-protest-land-forces-international-defence-exposition

[6] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104328710

[7] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/08/thousands-of-anti-war-protesters-to-disrupt-controversial-weapons-expo-in-melbourne

[8] ttps://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/tanks-trucks-and-guns-inside-melbournes-controversial-defence-expo/k0ajf3htu

[9] ttps://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/police-to-get-up-to-15-million-to-deal-with-anti-war-protests-this-week-20240910-p5k9co.html

[10] ttps://amp.9news.com.au/article/dd712abe-1fb6-4b8c-9c62-4192b3b91a97

[11] ttps://7news.com.au/news/thousands-of-anti-war-activists-start-disrupting-land-forces-weapons-expo-in-melbourne-c-16013759.amp

[12] ttps://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/police-pepper-spray-activists-as-protest-against-melbourne-weapons-expo-escalates/4en9xquy1

[13] ttps://www.smh.com.au/national/victoria/land-forces-2024-protests-live-thousands-of-demonstrators-disrupt-melbourne-weapons-expo-20240910-p5k9ee.html?post=p57kw8

[14] ttps://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/25000-protesters-to-surround-land-forces-defence-expo-in-melbourne-sparking-chaos/news-story/0753c6d2196e9e6a10f53c8add84271e?amp

[15] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104334816

[16] ttps://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-11/live-blog-land-forces-protest-melbourne-israel-gaza/104333922

[17] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/sep/12/melbourne-war-protests-land-forces-weapons-expo-ntwnfb

[18] ttps://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/land-forces-2024-protests-live-thousands-of-demonstrators-disrupt-melbourne-weapons-expo-20240910-p5k9ee.html

[19] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104339212

[20] ttps://www.pedestrian.tv/news/melbourne-protests-explained-land-forces-2024-expo/

[21] ttps://amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/sep/11/protesters-descend-on-melbournes-cbd-as-defence-industry-expo-opens

[22] ttps://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/am/protest-at-weapons-convention/104335756

[23] ttps://amp.abc.net.au/article/104347986

[24] Galindo Zárate, Jesús (December 2007). Historia General del Fútbol Mexicano (Primera ed.). México: Francisco J. Camargo. pp. 84–85.

[25] Calderón Cardoso, Carlos (July 1998). Crónica del fútbol mexicano: Por amor a la camiseta (Primera ed.). México: Clío.

[26] Ramírez, Carlos F. (June 2010). 11 décadas de fútbol mexicano (Primera ed.). México: Octavio Antonio Colmenares y Vargas.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[1]

[2]

[3]