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

< May 01	May 03 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Varna University of Management[edit]

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

Organization doesn't meet notability requirements. Moritoriko (talk) 23:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Bulgaria. Moritoriko (talk) 23:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Weekend (Canadian band)[edit]

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

This article was evidently intended to be nominated by Originalcola (talk · contribs), but they accidentially nominated the talk page instead. Their original rationale follows:

Clearly lacking any significant coverage and being non-notable, failing to meet any notability criteria. No reliable sources exist and band is not mentioned except for trivial mentions.

Note that Originalcola previously attempted to PROD this with the same rationale; this was declined by an IP. Also note that this is not the much-more-well-known singer the Weeknd, who is also from Canada. The third and final note is that my involvement is entirely procedural and I offer no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Amiras[edit]

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. I found this transactional announcement and this interview. JTtheOG (talk) 16:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 16:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Along with the interview provided, there's also this, just about enough for a WP:GNG pass. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olanrewaju Smart[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL (WP:NSUBPOL), sources are mostly WP:ROUTINE and WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. In short, the offices being occupied by the subject do not guarantee notability under WP:NPOL and fail WP:GNG too. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Chief of Staff to the Speaker, House of Representatives is a notable position in Nigerian politics. His successor Jake Dan-Azumi also has a Wikipedia article. Batmanthe8th (talk) 17:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Batmanthe8th Oh, thank you for bringing my attention there. Under what criteria do you think COSs are notable? They do not fall under any and have to pass WP:GNG which this one and the one you have pointed me to utterly fails. Even the COS page is AfD-worthy. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recall accepting the COS page a while back on the generous side due to its notable role in Nigerian politics. I didn't nessesarily imagine the individual people getting their own articles unless they were notable for something else, though. TheBritinator (talk) 23:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: being the Chief of Staff to the Speaker, House of Representatives and Senior Special Assistant to the President are notable positions. I know all of the Senior Advisor to the President of the United States are considered notable, so why not Nigeria especially that this article have good sources to confirm WP:42 FuzzyMagma (talk) 22:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Six out of 8 of the current sources are pieces about being the new chief of staff which do not pass SIGCOV. I am sure all the senior advisors to the President of the United States are not inherently notable, but they all appear pass GNG clearly. This is not the case here. This subject is not inherently notable and also fails GNG. Also, CoS to a HoR is not to be compared with a CoS-ish position to the President of a country, who is the number one citizen of that country. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is where we differ. I think some positions make you inherently notable even if there is zero English sources. If I can draw parallels, for academic being a Fellow of the Royal Society automatically makes notable, regardless. You are within your rights to disagree especially that the Wikipedia:Notability (politics) has failed. FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — Fails WP:NPOL.Chief of Staff must meet WP:GNG OR any other WP:SNG. Shoerack (talk) 12:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2018 Caloocan Supremos season[edit]

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

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of notability under SNG or GNG. The SNG explicitly says that these are not presumed notable and thus require GNG sources. Misses that by several levels. The one source that the article has is about the league. "Stats" only article also relates to wp:not. Tagged for sources since January. Previously deleted. North8000 (talk) 15:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Have you noticed that all the teams from 2018 have season entries? Geschichte (talk) 16:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, but now I looked....at just the ones in the NPP que. It is then further multiplied by articles on pairs of those teams. Titled as rivalry articles, where (per a quick preliminary look) the sources don't describe them as rivalries. North8000 (talk) 20:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as it stands, fails GNG on its face, but I'm not sure how to conduct a BEFORE search for this. SportingFlyer T·C 17:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMO the ones excluded by the SNG have a near-zero chance of having GNG level sources. North8000 (talk) 19:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and

Philippines. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spoiled child[edit]

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

This is unencyclopaedic mess of original research. This simply does not belong here. This needs WP:TNT at the very least. TarnishedPath^talk 03:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. TarnishedPath^talk 03:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think, rename to something like Spoiling (parenting). Definitely A very notable concept there, must be fixable. Hyperbolick (talk) 06:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:NOTEVERYTHING This doesn't stop at defining the subject, but sections of "Potential causes", "Differential diagnosis", "Prevention", " Treatment" . Wikipedia should not be giving medical definitions and possible ways to handle it. — Maile (talk) 19:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Hyperbolick

Perfecnot (talk) 03:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep, this concept is very notable. While it's true this article in its current state is essentially just someones opinion piece, and contains what is likely their own observations, it's not unfixable, we should keep this article, and edit it into an acceptable place. Samoht27 (talk) 16:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting due to a lack of keep rationale. It'd be helpful if someone could how this concept is supposedly notable and why we shouldn't WP:TNT.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would comment as well, not necessarily strictly psychological, additionally a term in literature and history. Hyperbolick (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I seriously doubt the competence of all the !keep voters. Not just subject matter competence, but wiki/afd policy competence. What's next? Let's create Angry child and Happy child...because obviously these "concepts are very notable". Obviously. But also very unsuitable for an ecyclopedia. This article is a high-school level essay with WP:OR, which will later evolve into a messy synthesis. Spoiling in early childhood tends to create characteristic reactions that persist, fixed, into later life. These can cause significant social problems. Spoiled children may have difficulty coping with situations such as teachers scolding them or refusing to grant extensions on homework assignments, playmates refusing to allow them to play with their toys and playmates refusing playdates with them, a loss in friends, failure in employment, and failure with personal relationships. Wow, an excellent scientific prognosis of something which isn't a recognized disorder. What is this joke? Reads like 13 steps to deal with spoiled child- wikihow, but much worse. As Maile points out, Wikipedia should not be giving medical definitions and possible ways to handle it. This isn't just banal crap. This is dangerous for readers. I advise keep voters to not participate in afd's. This is not a WP:TNT article. This is outside the scope of wikipedia, and should not be recreated. — hako9 (talk) 02:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notably the creator of this article got permabanned for creating/editing exactly this sort of content and not taking advice over many years that they needed to stop. TarnishedPath^talk 02:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Imagine a parent of "spoiled" child reading the article and the child suffering the consequences. — hako9 (talk) 03:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, this is exactly the sort of pseudo-health advice which shouldn't be on Wikipedia. TarnishedPath^talk 07:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I retort, WP:SOFIXIT. Not unfixable -- could use Alfie Kohn's The Myth of the Spoiled Child to debunk notions obviously popular enough to require a book just to debunk them. Term has 5K+ Google Scholar articles. Just improvable, not outside the scope. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Create an article on the book you mentioned. Or write a effin blog. Term has 5K+ Google Scholar articles. How many hits does happy child, naughty child, sad child or say, adventurous child have. Find some books on those too. — hako9 (talk) 08:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, think I’ll keep it right here. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm undecided between delete or reduce to a stub with TNT. I removed one completely unreferenced section which said literally nothing. Then I got to the "Treatment" section and that is what convinced me that the majority of the article is no good. The idea that a physician can prescribe "treatment" for a "spoiled" child is clear pseudo-medical misinformation and potentially harmful to our readers and their children. I think that the only way to save this, if we even want to, would be to move the referencing into the lede (which is not too bad) and then ditch the body entirely to make a stub. --DanielRigal (talk) 15:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 15:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is so obviously notable a concept in popular culture that a simple search will find dozens of sources. Bearian (talk) 18:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If what you're claiming is true then it needs a WP:TNT at the very least and a rewrite as a stub. Anything more than a stub is bound to be a mess of WP:OR and dangerous pseudo-medical advise as we see with the current article. TarnishedPath^talk 05:49, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Really only "As syndrome" section must go. Or even be rewritten such that it makes clear that these are just scratched old theories. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Its notable and AFD is not for cleanup. Desertarun (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist for more perspectives to try and form a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gumbi Ortiz[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:MUSICBIO. Essentially no coverage in reliable, independent sources online aside from an All About Jazz article. Meets no other notability criteria. Obviously created for undisclosed payments (see User_talk:WikiDMM). Clear friend a ^💬 21:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Florida, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Found this source from the TB times [1]. Also, All About Jazz profiles are typically self-published, as this one appears to be, so that doesn't count towards notability. Mach61 23:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per this Orlando Sentinel article. Mach61 23:06, 2 May 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 Withdrawn‎ by nom with no other participation. (non-admin closure) Skynxnex (talk) 23:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kerosene 454[edit]

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

The article doesn't cite any sources. I've found plenty of mentions of the band, but the most significant amount of coverage I was able to find was in the June 1997 edition of CMJ.

Edit: Nevermind, I forgot to check AllMusic, which has a biography and staff reviews of two of their releases. toweli (talk) 21:35, 2 May 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, D.C.. toweli (talk) 21:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw AfD. toweli (talk) 21:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was procedural close‎ as a malformed nomination. This appears to be another one of those nominations where the associated article was intended to be nominated, but it was accidentially done on the talk page instead, thereby sending that to AfD. I'll (equally-procedurally) start a proper nomination imminently. (non-admin closure) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The Weekend (Canadian band)[edit]

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

Clearly lacking any significant coverage and being non-notable, failing to meet any notability criteria. No reliable sources exist and band is not mentioned except for trivial mentions. Originalcola (talk) 21:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Music. Originalcola (talk) 21:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:21, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embedded Board eXpandable[edit]

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

Fails WP: N. I cannot find enough sources that are secondary, notable, and cover the subject that could reasonably considered in-depth to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:54, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 21:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability. Wikipedia is not a software database/directory. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carterson[edit]

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Sources are either PRs/promo puffs/Advertorials, WP:RUNOFTHEMILL both primary and independent of the subject. Non-notable musician. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 21:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article about a musician that contains WP:LOTSOFSOURCES, yet WP:ROUTINE. Undoubtedly figured WP:MILL, which can be notable in the future! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:01, 3 May 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.

Mitchell Gordon[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Maka[edit]

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

I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject, a New Zealand rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. It seems like he has been out of the sport for four years now. JTtheOG (talk) 20:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and New Zealand. JTtheOG (talk) 20:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caine Woolerton[edit]

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

Poorly sourced rugby BLP. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT as I am unable to find anything more than trivial mentions. JTtheOG (talk) 20:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and Wales. JTtheOG (talk) 20:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davron Cameron[edit]

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

Rugby player who played a handful of games. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT as I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 20:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 20:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sonatikuri High School[edit]

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

Run-of-the-mill school with no significant coverage in reliable sources, thus failing to meet WP:NORG. Additionally, I am nominating the following pages created by the same user which share the same notability issues:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Schools, India, and West Bengal. GSS ^💬 15:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The bundled nomination is going to take a little longer to be sure on. Sonatikuri has a web presence but almost a suspicious lack in other sources. I expect lack of newspaper coverage is down to this being from India, although JSTOR has a single advert for the school in amongst other articles. I wondered if there were alternate names, but the web search suggested this is right. The school has a small staff and I could not find enrolment numbers, but is clearly not large. That one is not looking very notable. Much the same can be said of Sarajubala Vidyapith. Amtala High School, however, has multiple hits in books [2], and this may be through a notable alumnus/alumna. Ultimately none of them may show notability (I see problems with most) but some reading to do there. It also gets a mention in this paper [3] which says There are some renowned educational institutions in Murshidabad district which include Amtala High School. If Amtala were unbundled from this, I would say delete the other two. This might be a good idea, as we want to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK, which could occur if Amtala really is renowned. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caribbean Lowlands[edit]

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

WP:UNSOURCED since creation, WP:OR. Same as Southern Caribbean and Caribbean South America. Formally proposing deletion after rejected WP:PROD. NLeeuw (talk) 18:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Latin America and Caribbean. NLeeuw (talk) 18:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are a lot sources in Google Scholar that use the term, mainly in giving the location of animals or plants being studied as a region of specific countries, but I couldn't find anything that actually defines it beyond a general term for the lower-elevation area between the mountains and the Caribbean Sea, nothing that describes it as a whole. Most use a descriptive lowercase "lowlands" rather than as a specific name. Nor are there other articles on here that list it as a Central American region or even something that would be a good merge target. Therefore without usable sources or substantive content to include here, delete. Reywas92^Talk 20:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's lots of sources that use the term in scholarly articles and physical geography books, mostly in the Costa Rican sense, such as [4] [5]. Needs expansion, not deletion. SportingFlyer T·C 22:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added sources to the article. SportingFlyer T·C 22:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tristan Cousins[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; everything else seems to lack any notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United Kingdom. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carrier Air Group TEN[edit]

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

No significant coverage in reliable sources. Citation 1, while reliable, contains nothing more than the dates during which this formation existed [6]. Citations 2-4 seem to be self-published blogs and thus not reliable. Citation 5 seems to be about a different unit entirely, and citation 6 is a dead link that isn't in the Internet Archive. While I don't doubt that this unit existed, there is no evidence that it deserves a standalone article. Toadspike (talk) 19:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This formation has an entry at List of United States Navy aircraft wings. I would support that page as a redirect target. Toadspike (talk) 19:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America. Owen× ☎ 20:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TitanAir[edit]

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

While an interesting idea, there is no evidence that this topic has received sustained coverage. Coverage is limited to the grant announcement and is mostly based on a blog post [7] by the creator of this idea – the only source currently cited is probably the best, but even this one describes the grant as "small" and says "It's unlikely that TitanAir will make it to the outer solar system anytime soon". Toadspike (talk) 19:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the CNET article cited, other sources I found include [8] (no sigcov), [9] (also no sigcov), [10] (deprecated at RSP), and [11] (also not sigcov). All of these are based solely on the grant announcement, demonstrating no significant coverage and limited value as secondary sources. There are a few more similar articles on the web. Toadspike (talk) 19:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spaceflight-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of sports team names and symbols derived from Greek and Roman antiquity[edit]

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

Non-notable grouping that fails to meet the WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 19:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 19:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mythology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For what it's worth, there is this web article. Daranios (talk) 19:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per NOM, also Wikipedia:Set index articles; no shared characteristic to define inclusion in the list, only the name.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 01:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of sports teams named Spartans[edit]

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

Non-notable grouping that fails to meet the WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 19:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 19:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable grouping -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE and of course WP:LISTN. This is trivial. Conyo14 (talk) 20:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, also Wikipedia:Set index articles; no shared characteristic, only the name.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 01:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wholly trivial. Azuredivay (talk) 07:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brittany Bradford[edit]

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

Not a notable actress and very promotionally written article. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 18:50, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 18:50, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Television, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to her television work, she is also notable as a stage actress. See https://www.broadwayworld.com/people/Brittany-Bradford/#credits Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Newbigging[edit]

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

Poorly sourced rugby BLP. All I found in a WP:BEFORE search were trivial mentions such as 1 and 2. JTtheOG (talk) 18:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and Oceania. JTtheOG (talk) 18:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Tamura[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think these sources show the subject meets WP:GNG, and certainly that they meet WP:SPORTCRIT. There is enough coverage, especially in the first three examples, that goes beyond routine sports coverage and covers the subject directly.

JTtheOG (talk) 20:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Selena Zhao[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Canada, and Washington. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources already in the article have enough coverage to pass WP:GNG and certainly WP:SPORTCRIT. They go beyond routine sports coverage and cover the subject directly.

JTtheOG (talk) 21:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conrado Pesinato[edit]

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Information I found in a WP:BEFORE search seems to all be mostly related to their membership of the Graham Bonnet Band. Anything else I found is still solely related to their membership of a band (see WP:BANDMEMBER). Hey man im josh (talk) 17:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Brazil. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delawana Inn[edit]

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

This doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG. If kept, it would need TNTing for its tone and it has no sources. Boleyn (talk) 17:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kenny Koh[edit]

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Claim to notability is winning a singing competition in 2003, as well as participating in another in 2014 (WP:REALITYSINGER). Not seeing anything really outside of that, despite apparently releasing 3 albums. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Malaysia. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cambridge Chord Company[edit]

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

Does not appear to pass WP:NMUSIC. Coverage is mostly centered around the British Association of Barbershop Singers. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Sulphur tornado[edit]

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

This article was created WP:TOOSOON and has a multitude of structural, grammatical, and factual issues. Common practice in these situations is to first have a smaller section at the outbreak page (Tornado outbreak sequence of April 25–28, 2024 in this case) and only expand to an article after official surveys are released and lasting impacts are apparent. This tornado was nothing exceptional or anomalous, as killer EF3 tornadoes are fairly common. United States Man (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agreed on all points. I am personally in support of deletion.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 17:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)TornadoInformation12[reply]

Move back to draftspace. While there are some critical issues with this article, it does not need to be deleted. if WP:TOOSOON is the issue, then why not move it back to a draft so it can be worked on until it is ready for an article? MemeGod ._. (talk) 17:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changing to Merge and Redirect, as per Kingsmasher6's rationale. MemeGod ._. (talk) 18:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete entire article

We already have a section on the Sulphur tornado on the Tornado outbreak sequence of April 25-28, 2024 article page. I agree, this is unnecessary work by user:MemeGod27. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That works too, but whether we delete or move to drafts, the main takeaway is please DO NOT make a tornado article like this again until you have the skills, understanding, and know-how to do so. You simply aren't ready for this yet. As I was told when I was in your shoes: "observe more, edit less". Otherwise, it's like trying to drive a motorcycle when you don't have the experience; you're gonna wreck no matter how confident you may feel. That's what happened here. The best thing you can do right now is take a more passive role and focus more on observing how these articles are created, worded, and sourced.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 18:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)TornadoInformatoin12[reply]

Move to draftspace. I agree with @MemeGod27, I think the article should be retained in draftspace until the info needed to finish it is released. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 18:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changing to Merge and Redirect. Seems to be a better option, retains the good information, and trims the content. We can always split it back out later if we need to.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 18:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Environment, and Oklahoma. Skynxnex (talk) 17:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Tornado outbreak sequence of April 25–28, 2024#Sulphur, Oklahoma as an alternative to deletion. The article is in poor quality and the tornado summary could be merged into the mentioned section, since that section mostly lacks a summary of the tornado. The aftermath of the Sulphur tornado could also be placed in the aftermath section of the tornado outbreak sequence article as well. I personally don't think moving this back to draftspace would be a good idea since the article was created too soon; additionally, merging a portion of the article's content to the targeted section would be best. Also opposed to deletion as said above. Thanks! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 18:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TornadoInformation12 just stop with the lectures. I got it the first 5 times. You don't have to jump on everything I say, and your "constructive talks" are seen as extremely derogatory and full-on harassment by me. I am now stepping away from this, and retaining a NPOV. MemeGod ._. (talk) 18:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for your well-meaning, but this article should be deleted. Wikipedia is not a newspaper or a reporting site, time should be taken before a decision regarding article-genesis should be made. See WP:WWIN for more details.

Also, I don't think he is lecturing you. I believe many users here aren't emotionally attached to their words and like to vent at others who have edit conflicts with them. Perhaps you ignored his advice and TornadoInformation12 is frustrated, given all he stated was basically "this article is in poor quality, created too soon, learn a few more tips for editing, lets all take a break". Its a valid point. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 21:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is honestly exactly why I left. I’m done here and with this article. Thanks :( MemeGod ._. (talk) 22:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Tornado outbreak sequence of April 25–28, 2024 since it is a perfectly suitable target. Might a snow close be possible on this? Even the editor who started the article, and did most of the writing for it, is opting for merging/redirecting. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would second this, if that's an option.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Tornado outbreak sequence of April 25–28, 2024 and merge the content that can be reliably sourced that isn't already on the parent article. This should not receive an article until much more detailed information comes out from the National Weather Service (NWS Norman, for this event) and the tornado itself has lasting notability cited in reliable sources well after it has taken place. I did not support the creation of this article initially because of the heavy usage of preliminary info, lack of information present, and the speculations/personal estimates that the editor used to create the article, and I stand by that opinion. ChrisWx 🌀 (talk - contribs) 20:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I find a redirect for a tornado that lasted only 12 minutes and only hit one town, albeit pretty hard, to be unnecessary. In all honesty, I'm about to nuke all 3 of the Oklahoma tornado sections I put in until the NWS Norman puts out more information. This was premature and is yet another example of excessively trying to split individual tornadoes into their own articles. We've recently had other editors coming to us saying that some of our summaries in both sections and articles are too long. We need to be mindful of that for the future or else this is going to get more and more out of hand. ChessEric 00:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Loblaw boycott[edit]

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

WP:NOTNEWS, WP:CRYSTALBALL. A boycott of only about 60 thousand people and probably less will not drastically affect the largest supermarket chain in Canada. 🔥Jala peño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 17:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Canada. 🔥Jala peño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 17:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd like to argue that I had took the adequate steps in creating the article in a way that does not treat the situation as if it is acting as a WP:CRYSTALBALL. One could argue that it's nothing more than a boycott that originated from Reddit, but it's absolutely reached far beyond that, otherwise it wouldn't have been making national news, nor would I have created the article in the first place. There's a good amount of sources covering about this topic not only during/near the beginning of the boycott, but in the months leading up to it as well. Additionally pasting this here from what I've previously stated, but this is easily one of the most established consumer boycott movements directly related to the 2021–2023 inflation surge and in the 2020s overall outside of the American conservative-led Bud Light and Target Pride Month boycotts/backlash movements.

Adding on to this, but the only editors who have seen this as potentially being delete-worthy were a number of WP:ITN voters. It's received a passing review as well as a "go" sign by an Administrator on the DYK nomination (with the exception that a QPQ had to be completed). B3251 (talk) 17:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 17:50, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Loblaw. Until we actually know the size of this boycott, a separate article is simply not necessary. If it draws 100,000s and has continued coverage over the month, now that's likely something, but it is CRYSTAL to predict how much of a planned boycott (particularly one organized on Reddit) will have. --Masem (t) 02:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Loblaw Companies, in a reduced form. Too recent. Almost all of the coverage is from last week. I can't find support for the boycott being reported on prior to 18/4/2024 (although I haven't done WP:BEFORE level searching). I also couldn't find support for the vague suggestion planning started in January 2024.
The Steal from Loblaw thing may or may not be worth merging, but it seems like it's a parallel thing with which the organizers are denying any relationship. Oblivy (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017 Peshawar bombings[edit]

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

The 4 sources are from the time of event. No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT. Also no deaths reported so WP:NOTNEWS also applies. LibStar (talk) 09:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Terrorism, and Pakistan. LibStar (talk) 09:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (cut down) to Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2017. Sources describe it as terrorism. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:17, 25 April 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) 17:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Foday Sillah[edit]

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

The title and status he has earned are not encyclopedic. Redivy (talk) 21:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Sport of athletics. Redivy (talk) 21:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is inappropriate to call one of the best athletes from an African nation as "not encyclopedic"; whether we can find the coverage to demonstrate notability, that will be another story. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:59, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics and Sierra Leone. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:06, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't see coverage about a person with this name, a few hits on a school in The Gambia with this name. Happy to revisit if others can turn up sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 00:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - nominator needs to familiarize themselves with WP:NOTENCYCLOPEDIC. Low effort nominations like this are going to be thrown out whether the subject is notable or not. Sergecross73 msg me 00:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on Sergecross73's comment, Low effort nominations like this are going to be thrown out whether the subject is notable or not. I was able to find a lot of verifiable information about this person that was not mentioned at all in the nominated article or nomination statement, including his exploits at the World U20 championships where he was the highest-placing male Sierra Leonean athlete ever, he was actually a two-time Olympian and not just at the 1992 Olympics, and he has a still-standing national record at 200 metres. Finding contemporary African news reports from this period is difficult, but I believe there is enough evidence here to know that further coverage exists. --Habst (talk) 17:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The information can often, as well as in this case, be found via What Links Here. It still needs non-database sources Geschichte (talk) 06:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW I don't think anyone, besides maybe some people who are already editors, looks up people without articles here and then finds and clicks "what links here" to find information about them. A standalone article is much more beneficial to readers, as that way we get both the bare information one would get from a table-link-mention and plenty of other interesting, additional details explained with context. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Geschichte, thanks for bringing this up. Not all of the information could be found via What Links Here, for example the fact that Sillah's World U20 performance was the best by any Sierra Leonean. Also, if the article were to be deleted, the standard practice is then that any links to the article would be un-linked per WP:REDLINK ("Red links should not be made to articles deleted because the topic was judged unencyclopedic or lacking notability"), meaning that Special:WhatLinksHere would be useless (text searches are not reliable because they could include people with the same name) and much of this structured data would essentially be lost to history. --Habst (talk) 17:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BeanieFan11 My point was about using What Links Here for nominators (and other editors). The reason why Lugnuts' articles were so horrible, was that they typically mention competing in a single Olympic event, where the athlete's career often had much more longevity. Geschichte (talk) 20:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ordinarily, I'd close this AFD as a procedural Keep due to the lack of a valid deletion rationale but we do have an opinion to Delete this article so I'm relisting to see if editors can come up with additional sourcing to demonstrate that this subject is "encyclopedic".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep, as the article stands today it seems enough for the article to not be deleted. Themanwithnowifi (talk) 15:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The nomination statement notwithstanding, not a single source with significant coverage has been located. Sillah wasn't that high-ranking as an athlete that we can jettison the demand for sources because we think WP:ITSINTERESTING. Geschichte (talk) 20:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Geschichte, there is no deadline for Wikipedia. I believe the info we know about Sillah is conclusive that coverage must exist of him based on his accomplishments making him the best in his country, but it's a matter of having access to the African sources from the 90s that would have covered him. Scans of these may become available in 1, 10, or 20 years – that's why WP:NEXISTS is a policy, to allow for time to get the sources. But saying to drafty in this case is essentially saying to delete the article in 6 months, because most drafts are abandoned. What do you think? --Habst (talk) 20:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was responding to an older version of the reply that was a draftify vote. It was edited to Comment after I started writing my reply. --Habst (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Habst, I think there is a good reason why the rule about coverage was added. The days when articles could be built solely on databases and primary sources are over, we have to face that. Geschichte (talk) 07:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Geschichte, thank you, which rule are you referring to? I am open to deleting this and any other page based on a rule, but I just can't see what is being violated. I've edited Wikipedia both before and after WP:NSPORTS2022, and it does not invalidate WP:NEXIST. Respectfully, --Habst (talk) 10:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NEXIST = grasping at straws. You personally think there are lots of significant coverage about this and that person, but that doesn't make it true and how likely it is varies a lot. For a person like Nikolay Antonov, it was overwhelmingly likely, but here - with the highlights being an U20 performance and a slow indoor record - it is nowhere near as likely. Geschichte (talk) 08:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Geschichte, thanks for your perspective because I think the challenge is important. NEXIST isn't grasping at straws; the idea that we can know that coverage exists based on depth of accomplishments is the entire basis of subject-specific notability guidelines existing. Yes, it was used successfully on Nikolay Atanasov, but it has also been used successfully in other cases such as Abdou Manzo, understanding that Sillah's 200m record (1069 pts) is actually better than Manzo's record (924 pts).

Also, I think that the subject is being sold short on likeliness of coverage. Sillah was, at a time, the best sprinter in Sierra Leone, a country of 8 million people. In order to be selected for all these international teams, he had to have won some sort of national championship or proven himself on the national level. The likelihood that there is no contemporary coverage of this person existing in the world is, in my opinion, impossible. --Habst (talk) 13:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, every country in the world has 50 national champions every year for men and women. Not all of them get coverage. Mind exercises "in your world" about what ought to exist are not something Wikipedia can base itself upon. Do you even know whether Sierra Leone was able to arrange national championships during a brutal civil war? I think you do not. Geschichte (talk) 10:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Geschichte, let's try to work this out together and come to an agreement. There's a difference between being a national champion, and being the fastest or strongest person from a country at a given time – the former is far more arbitrary than the latter. The results from Sillah prove that he was the fastest from his country for a decent stretch of time, representing Sierra Leone at several international competitions and setting a national record. Where there actually was a formal national championship is irrelevant in determining that fact.

During war-time, athletes representing countries usually receive outsized coverage, not the other way around – for example see the substantial coverage for Ukranian athletes like [12] [13] [14], not to mention the Tigray War during which several Ethiopian athletes received coverage recently. Based on this evidence, we can conclude that coverage exists, and the task of finding it up to us now. --Habst (talk) 15:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of articles from the US are not "evidence" for anything. If enlarged coverage during wartime is a universal tenet, where are the articles in the Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and San Diego Union Tribune - or any newspaper from a developed country - about Foday Sillah? Geschichte (talk) 05:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:03, 2 May 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 redirect‎ to Nival (company)#Technology. A few more participants at AFD and this discussion wouldn't have needed to be relisted three times. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:27, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enigma Engine[edit]

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

Video game engine used in a handful of games circa 2003. No actual coverage whatsoever. My redirect was correctly undone as it is not mentioned in the target article. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 12:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Software. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 12:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This one is very cut and dry – I found nothing from reliable sources about the subject itself and I think anything that is found could easily be incorporated into the Blitzkrieg video game article that this engine seems to have been created for. Nothing in book searches as well (where you'll commonly find coverage of this kind of thing). Nomader (talk) 17:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Nival (company)#Technology as a WP:ATD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect again or delete: The features description is hardly encyclopedic and the one source is an interview. IgelRM (talk) 20:13, 19 April 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) 02:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Nival (company)#Technology. toweli (talk) 22:19, 2 May 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 Abductors (1972 film)[edit]

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

Movie fails to meet General Notability Guideline, No award or nominations has the movie receive. Also note should be taken that IMDb is not considered a reliable source for proving notability.The only source for this movie is https://www.nytimes.com/1972/01/29/archives/the-screenthe-abductors-begins-run-at-the-demille.html. No other source can be found on Google. Meligirl5 (talk) 16:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Film, Television, and Theatre. Meligirl5 (talk) 16:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheri Caffaro. Added things.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is your valid point for your vote. You just said keep and see also to an actress who isn’t also notable. I see your contribution to this movie article but it still doesn’t clear the point why it was nominated for an AFD. You just copied the statement from the only news I pointed out and make that a “About” of the movie. I really don’t know what you have been doing on AFD discussion but after reading this I felt Liz is right.--Meligirl5 (talk) 18:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just one thing: I just copied the statement from the only news (you) pointed out and make that a “About” of the movie....not sure I understand everything you say but ...really? That NYT article was added yesterday (23:30 GMT) to the article about the actress....by me.....as you evidently know since you commented that edit. But you're welcome. As for the rest, no comment. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article now has reviews from The New York Times and The Baltimore Sun. Toughpigs (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Baltimore Sun is a dead link affter clicking on it. It doesn’t show anything. --Meligirl5 (talk) 18:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Meligirl5 I've fixed the Baltimore Sun link. Skynxnex (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay great. Meligirl5 (talk) 18:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I haven't added these to the article since I'm not 100% sure how to integrate them and there's enough for a keep, but Sight and Sound had a one paragraph review 10 picks from the grindhouse (paywalled but wiki library can see it) and Canadian Newspapers Limited Partnership (looks like that a wire service-y thing) has a couple sentence review of it for the DVD release The Abductors (paywalled as well). Skynxnex (talk) 18:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The film was reviewed by the New York Times and made over $2 million at the box office. Britfilm (talk) 04:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdulquawiy Abdulganiyu Olododo[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL obviously and WP:GNG. Current sources are either PRs or passing mentions. Nothing gives WP:SIGCOV. Non-notable politician or "serial entrepreneur". Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bajirao's Konkan Campaign[edit]

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

The article is entirely based on original research and the synthesis of multiple events involving various states. It discusses military conflicts labeled as "Bajirao's Konkan Campaign," incorporating entities such as the Siddis, Nizam of Hyderabad, the British East India Company, and the Portuguese Empire. However, no reliable sources consider all these entities as belligerent allies against the Marathas during Bajirao I's campaign. The creator has conflated conflicts involving Bajirao with those of other kingdoms/states/entities and inserted "Maratha victory" in the infobox, despite the differing outcomes recorded in historical records. It's unclear what the author intended, but the content of the article largely duplicates information already present in numerous parent articles. This attempt seems to glorify an entity through the use of WP:SYNTH and WP:OR, combining unrelated conflicts. Imperial ^[AFCND] 16:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, India, Portugal, and England. Imperial ^[AFCND] 16:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:If articles of this kind fall within the scope, we could also maintain an article titled Alexander the Great's Punjab Campaign, alongside Indian campaign of Alexander the Great and Battle of Hydaspes. Ironically, this would involve including both the Achaemenid Empire and the Pauravas in a single infobox!! That would afford everyone an opportunity to express their creativity, but this isn't the appropriate venue for it.--Imperial ^[AFCND] 16:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Rutter[edit]

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

Article on a British man killed fighting in Syria. Seems completely non notable, was only reported in the news because he died. A sad event, but not one that makes him notable. No sustained coverage of him since this either, all sources seem to be directly after his death/repatriation in 2017. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Events, Military, Syria, and England. Skynxnex (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karl Girolamo[edit]

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

Notability not established. Just a bunch of small roles, mostly in projects that aren't notable. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 15:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 15:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, California, New Jersey, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Stars F.C.[edit]

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

Only has two sources, both from the same website and neither being enough for notability. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Islands. Skynxnex (talk) 17:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lyon FC (Palau)[edit]

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

Article relies entirely on a single source Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Islands. Skynxnex (talk) 17:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Palau Soccer League. JTtheOG (talk) 18:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Indian Kingdoms overthrown due to Muslim conquests[edit]

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

Fancruft-esque POV article backed by author's original research and synthesis of different sources. Ratnahastin (talk) 10:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and India. Ratnahastin (talk) 10:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 10:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge to Muslim conquests in the Indian subcontinent. Can't agree that this is made up by the synthesis of sources, as most of the list-type article exists similar way. As the author, I do agree that it appears in an abnormal way, and that can be overcome by copyediting. The idea of the article indeed notable.--Imperial ^[AFCND] 10:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Muslim conquests in the Indian subcontinent per WP:ATD; that page is over 12,600 words already, so any merge would be unhelpful for page length. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources in article and child articles show this subject has been discussed as a group meeting NLIST and it serves a navigation purpose for readers meeting WP:CLN. A merge would not improve either the content here or the target. I think this is an appropriate SUMMARYSTYLE split from Muslim conquests in the Indian subcontinent. If there are issues with the content, they can be cleaned up on the article talk page; any POV issues can be handled with cn and fv tags rather than afd. // Timothy :: talk 07:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 15:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tharahai Cuthbert[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL (for now) and WP:GNG, the subject is only a candidate of an assembly election that is to come, hopefully, in July. She is yet to be elected, we don't even know if she'd be. So, for now, it fails WP:NPOL and also WP:GNG isn't satisfied. Draftifying would also not be a bad idea. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Tamil Nadu. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chioma Rowland[edit]

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

The subject of this article fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. She is only known for being the wife of Davido. She does not have a notable modeling or chef career. This article is pretty much WP:PROMO. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 14:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and Nigeria. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 14:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:ANYBIO, COI oozing right on this one. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Written like an autobiography, the article is basically just WP:PROMO. BerryForPerpetuity (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per BerryForPerpetuity Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Fashion, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WISEA J120037.79-784508.3[edit]

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

This object does not seem to meet the notability guideline for astronomical objects. I cannot find any sources with significant coverage besides the discovery paper or press releases directly based on that paper. ^Complex/_Rational 14:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 17:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Property Finder[edit]

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

Quite frankly, the sources are: company SPIP (not even about the company, just quotes about the market); more SPIP; SPIP about one of their events; more investor relations/market data; announcement of publicity initiative; funding announcement; interview; interview; more interview; funding; more funding; even more funding; product announcement; M&A; another M&A. In other news, more market predictions, more routine announcements.

What's missing: Any semblance of any coverage anywhere close to meeting WP:ORGDEPTH. It seems impossible that this article would become anything other than an investor relations brochure. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Websites, Middle East, and United Arab Emirates. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Lahyani[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Essentially the same reason as last time. Delete because the only coverage is WP:SPIP, the article is promotional and for failing to meet any notability criteria. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Websites, United Arab Emirates, and Switzerland. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cardiff Rift[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG its WP:ALLPLOT and has been tagged for notability for 12 years Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 14:31, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Wales. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 14:31, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Well, for one, Illuminating Torchwood has a lot to say about the topic at various places, but usually calls it "the Rift" or "the rift" rather than the Cardiff Rift. Daranios (talk) 15:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Daranios Any chance you could add this to the article (and ping me)? There is a receptions section already, but sourced to a meh newspaper so far, and nothing else. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:55, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Collecting further sources, shorter but still relevant are: Once Upon a Time Lord, pp. 129-130, "'You guys and your cute little categories": Torchwood, The Space-Time Rift and Cardiff's Postmodern, Postcolonial and (avowedly) Pansexual Gothic", and very brief but calls it "a key point in the mythology of Doctor Who during the Tenth Doctor era", this web article. Daranios (talk) 07:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

K.S. Hamza[edit]

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

Fails WP:POLITICIAN for the lack of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. There is no reference to winning an election or being in a position of power in another party to qualify as a political activist WP:POLITICIAN ~ Spworld2 (talk) 2:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Kerala. Spworld2 (talk) 2:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 25. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in elections they have not yet won already — but this makes no claim that the subject has preexisting notability for any other reason. Obviously no prejudice against recreation after election day if he wins, but just standing as a candidate is not in and of itself grounds for an article now. Bearcat (talk) 18:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consulate General of the United States, Surabaya[edit]

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

Lacking secondary sources specifically about the consulate. Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 11:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Organizations, Indonesia, and United States of America. AusLondonder (talk) 11:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 4 of the 6 sources are primary. Embassies are not inherently notable, consulates even less so. Fails GNG and WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Indonesia–United_States_relations#Diplomatic_missions. Reywas92^Talk 14:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consulate-General of the United Kingdom, Saint Petersburg[edit]

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

Lacking secondary sources specifically about the consulate. Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 11:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Organizations, Russia, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 11:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We should keep. It's relevant to the wider history of UK - Russia relations. Notable because it was forced to close. Cantab12 (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two additional links was added now. WildStranger (talk) 12:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GamgokJanghowon station[edit]

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

AFC not yet ready for mainspace, moved to articlespace by non-reviewer. Article is 1 sentence stating nothing about the subject other than it exists. Article also only has one source. Train stations are not inherently notable per WP:NTRAINSTATION. Shadow311 (talk) 13:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shadow311 (talk) 13:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here are a few other examples of unremarkable documents

Namwon station

Gongju station

Gimje station

should also be discussed for deletion? SeolhwaMyeonggoktoAnsim (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+

Myeongbong station

Iyang station

Neungju station

Hwasun station

Nampyeong station

Hyocheon station

Seogwangju station

Dongsongjeong station SeolhwaMyeonggoktoAnsim (talk) 15:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 17:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify pending further improvements. Not yet ready for mainspace, no notability demonstrated. Happy to reconsider if the article improves in the next 7 days, please {{ping}} me. microbiologyMarcus ^{[petri dish·growths]} 18:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Jungbunaeryuk Line and draftify. It's a likely search target, and there's no evidence of meeting GNG with the current state of the article, but as a newly-built station there's a good chance that significant coverage can be found. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gauda–Gupta War[edit]

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

If the article focuses solely on the conflicts between the Gauda kingdom and the Guptas, it lacks WP:RS and historians do not consider these mutual campaigns as a single state of war, known as the "Gauda—Gupta War(s)". If we include the mutual conflicts between the Guptas and Gaudas in the article's scope, it becomes a result of original research and the synthesis of multiple conflicts. The conflicts involving Ishanavarman, Jivitagupta I, and Gopachandra are mentioned, but figures such as Kumaragupta III, Dharmaditya, and Samacharadeva are not addressed in the War section, but in the infobox. Upon reviewing the sources, authors are uncertain about the statements, with a weak consensus. In essence, the article combines non-notable military conflicts, cited by low-quality sources, involving different kingdoms—the Maukhari dynasty and the Later Gupta dynasty—against the Gauda kingdom, and labels it as the "Gauda—Gupta War". It adds minor conflicts to create the impression of significance, which is not justified. The article fails to meet GNG and contains original research. There are significant issues to address, AFD is limiting the discourse. Imperial ^[AFCND] 13:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Bangladesh, and India. Imperial ^[AFCND] 13:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep @ImperialAficionado There's no synthesis and OR, every cited source comes to the conclusion that Maukharis and later Guptas fought against Gaudas on behalf of the Gupta emperor.

It's quite likely that the war of Ishanavarman against the Gaudas whom he had forced to take shelter on the sea shore and the victory of Jivitagupta I over the enemies who stood on the sea-shore, refer to the expeditions launched by the Maukharis and the Later Guptas, separately or jointly, against the kings of Bengal discussed above who had declared their independence of the empire and had assumed the imperial title. Probably, the Maukhari and the Later Gupta rulers undertook these campaigns in the name of the Gupta emperor who was their nominal overlord, though their success increased their own power, and not of the emperor. From Goyal (1967).

The people of Gauda (W. Bengal) also achieved prominence, and a Maukhari chief claims to have defeated them. The Later Guptas also fought against some enemies who lived on the sea-shore. The reference in both cases may be to the kings of Bengal mentioned above, and the military campaigns of the Maukharis and the Later Guptas might have been undertaken, jointly or severally, on behalf of the Gupta emperor, their nominal overlord. Majumdar (1970).

Quoting these two should be enough. The other sources are right there, you should have thoroughly verified it before proposing AFD for this article. According to nom it's cited with low quality sources seriously? As far as I know the works of S.R. Goyal, R.C. Majumdar, K.K Dasgupta, H.K Barpujari and others are qualitatively reliable. If nom has any doubt for the cited sources then they should verify those at RSN.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonharojjashi (talk • contribs)

@Jonharojjashi, cited with low quality sources is referring my earlier statement in the proposal authors are uncertain about the statements, with a weak consensus, take the time to read the whole proposal reason. The weakness of the statements from the sources are evident from the above quotes, presented by yourself above. It's quite likely that...Probably, the Maukhari and the Later Gupta rulers un... from Goyal and The reference in both cases may be to the kings of Bengal mentioned above...and the Later Guptas might have been undertaken, jointly or from Majumdar. Keeping this weak statements aside, surprisingly I couldn't find any latest records about the event(s).--Imperial ^[AFCND] 17:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Another WP:SYNTH mess. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meff[edit]

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

Falls under WP:NOTDICT - already an entry in Wiktionary. Orphaned page. Orange sticker (talk) 12:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and England. Orange sticker (talk) 12:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unveiling the Wealthy Legacy of Sindh's Culture and Traditions[edit]

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

This is not an article, it is a travel-brochure version of Culture of Sindh. Judging from the opening paragraph, this seems to be the result of the original editor's misconception that Wikipedia is a blog-hosting site. The article is entirely sourced to other Wikipedia articles and two sources borrowed from Culture of Sindh. The title is not useful as a redirect, so that doesn't seem like a good option. —ShelfSkewed Talk 12:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant to Culture of Sindh. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 13:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Pakistan. Skynxnex (talk) 17:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: redundant, not a useful redirect, and it looks like little worthwhile to merge. Skynxnex (talk) 17:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Goražde Incident[edit]

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

Disputed draftification, so we are at AfD. WP:NOTNEWS applies even though this is historical news. No real context. There may be a valid target to redirect and merge to. In the absence of that I suggest draftify pending further work. Not ready for mainspace 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Shellwood (talk) 12:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify pending further improvements. Not yet ready for mainspace, no notability demonstrated. Happy to reconsider if the article improves in the next 7 days, please {{ping}} me. microbiologyMarcus ^{[petri dish·growths]} 18:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Aviation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Huliaipole[edit]

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

No named event of this name in sources. Events not independently notable to warrant a stand alone article (GNG/NOTNEWS). The brief incursion into Huliaipole is already sufficiently covered at Southern Ukraine campaign. Ongoing shelling is sufficiently covered at Huliaipole. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:21, 2 May 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 May 2. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Russia, and Ukraine. Shellwood (talk) 12:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As the principal author of the article, I would be remiss not to comment that I've put a lot of work into this and would be devastated to see it all thrown in the trash container. I'm not opposed to less notable events being cut down (previous edits have already been made by others to this effect) but I would ask that if this moves towards deletion, that relevant information be merged into relevant articles. Not voting either way right now, just asking that participants take this into consideration. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Super Dromaeosaurus, RadioactiveBoulevardier, Jebiguess, and HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith: Pinging previous talk page participants. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion - The article is well-sourced and extensive, and the sources showcase that there is more than enough for an article (Thus I strongly disaagree with Cinderella's statement that the "Events [are] not independently notable"). However, I think concerns about the article name are valid in relation to the article content. Thus, I propopse that insteads of deleting the article, we should rename it to Huliaipole during the Russian invasion of Ukraine or History of Huliaipole (2022–2024) to save the valuable work done for the article, while clarifying that this is the history of a certain city during a war instead of a single battle. Applodion (talk) 18:31, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename into Huliaipole during the Russian invasion of Ukraine. There is significant coverage of this town during the war and the battles for it, but I don't think any individual battle for the city or it's outskirts is notable for its own article. I also think that describing the city's role as one continuous battle is disingenuous; renaming the article to the the history of the town during the war and the role it played as one of the major cities on the southern front more than establishes notability while keeping the bulk of the information. Jebiguess (talk) 20:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion. Deletion seems unnecessary, but I think changing the article’s name would be fine. Professor Penguino (talk) 21:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge of encylopedic content to Southern Ukraine campaign and Huliaipole, if not already present there.

There exists no named "Battle of Huliaipole" in reliable sources, as Cinderella157 has mentioned, and I agree with Jebiguess that portraying these events as a battle is "disingenuous"; there appears to be strong consensus that, at least, the current title should not be retained.

The real debate lies in what to do with the content of the page, as the notability of the events has been called into question. Let us analyze the content of this article. One could probably divide most of it into two categories: (1) bombardment of the city of Huliaipole and (2) combat on the front line in some villages south of the city. Honestly speaking, much of the latter probably does not belong here - there is excessive undue mention of places a significant distance from the city, such as Novodarivka, Mala Tokmachka, and Velyka Novosilka.

With respect to the former category: the city lies close to a front line that has been largely stable for two years, so it is understandably a regular target of artillery bombardment. We do not have similar articles for other such frequently attacked places, nor should we be expected to – at a certain point, the 50th instance of "Russian forces shelled Huliaipole" is simply not notable enough for inclusion – this content should be dramatically condensed. Consider, for example, the sections for March 2024 and April 2024, and then read WP:NOTEVERYTHING. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 00:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge useful content without redirect per SaintPaulOfTarsus. Agree with nom that the article is yet another non-battle. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 03:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dushyant Dubey[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

As per the previous AfD, this article fails WP:GNG and WP:BLP1E. The two users who wanted this article kept was a sockpuppet and the page creator themselves. John Yunshire (talk) 11:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. John Yunshire (talk) 11:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh. Skynxnex (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ab Sadeghi-Nejad[edit]

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

After the cruft was removed, it seems there's nothing that supports WP:NPROF. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Massachusetts. UtherSRG (talk) 10:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Medicine, California, Illinois, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. No significant independent RS coverage that I could find. Only hits in WP:LIBRARY are his research papers and a quote in Men's Health about growth hormone therapy. His book is self-published and I couldn't find any reviews. That leaves us with WP:NPROF criteria. I think the research impact criterion is the only one that might apply, but I'm unfamiliar with the subject area so will leave that for others to evaluate. Jfire (talk) 14:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Jfire, others, I do not see signs of significant academic impact here. I see on Google Scholar several papers with a moderate number of citations, but in a medium-to-higher citation field. (Even in a lower citation field, I'm generally looking for several papers with more citations than the highest cited one I see of his.) Awards listed in the article are all WP:MILL, as is membership on an editorial board. I was cursory in checking NAUTHOR and GNG, but did not quickly see a pass. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MCL College of Arts and Science[edit]

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

Subject could be redirected to Mapúa Malayan Colleges Laguna. Sanglahi86 (talk) 09:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Philippines. Sanglahi86 (talk) 09:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soura Nath[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Repeatedly recreated article on an Indian photographer. Already deleted at a previous AfD in 2021. No significant claim of notability. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and India. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this is a copypaste move of the rejected Draft:Soura Nath, which in itself is problematic. I also suspect some COI issues, and queried this three weeks ago but so far without any response. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, needless to say, for zero evidence of notability of any flavour. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Photography, Maharashtra, and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete none of the refs are notability lending. Given this was previously deleted via AfD and the author's many attempts to post the rejected drafts directly into the mainspace, the namespace should likely be WP:SALTed. Best, GPL93 (talk) 12:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The person is already notable on internet.Phantomphoto1 (talk) 07:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

India at the 2024 ICC Men's T20 World Cup[edit]

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

These articles are unnecessary WP:CFORKs from the main article 2024 ICC Men's T20 World Cup, and are not required. We have never created articles for teams at Cricket World Cups before, as they are wholly unnecessary, and just copying content available on other articles, such as 2024 ICC Men's T20 World Cup and 2024 ICC Men's T20 World Cup squads. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket, South Africa, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, England, and Australia. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating articles for other countries at this event:

Keep - The following articles would be suitable as in the T20 World Cup, many matches will be played and in these articles, the readers can read the per match summary, team's tournament progression, tournament kit, scorecard, per team statistics and many more of the respective cricket team at a single article, which is not possible to mention at the 2024 ICC Men's T20 World Cup article. Any articles which haven't been created earlier doesn't mean it is unnecessary, there should be an article to record any team's particular tournament edition journey. Wowlastic10 (talk) 09:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tournament summaries should be in the main article anyway, which would cover the important matches and information, so a split out for match summaries for every match including the WP:ROUTINE coverage ones is not required. Tournament kit would be WP:TRIVIA, team statistics sounds like it would violate WP:NOTSTATS/WP:TRIVIA. None of this sounds like encyclopedic content, and just because people create these articles for e.g. IPL teams (which are questionable to do anyway), that doesn't mean they are valid WP:CFORKs for this tournament. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baddies (professional wrestling)[edit]

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

Article is little more than a brief plot summary which just duplicates information in each member's individual page. — Czello ^(music) 07:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. — Czello ^(music) 07:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Just another temporary/RNG stable by AEW. Baddies did not achieve anything. Cargill was a champion before the Baddies storyline. AEW and its sister ROH created many similar stables; e.g. Trustbusters. But since Baddies were part of Cargill's career, redirect it to Jade Cargill#All Elite Wrestling (2020–2023). The redirect has the potential to become an article again if AEW/ROH revives the stable. --Mann Mann (talk) 15:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RouteNote[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Out of the 9 sources in the article only 4 could have the potential to count towards NCORP, and out of the 4, I am not entirely satisfied with their independence. ([15][16][17][18]). This article appeared for me while doing WP:NPP and I wasn't comfortable accepting it and with the last AfD being no consensus, I thought I'd opt for the AfD route. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and United Kingdom. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of ArenaBowl broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources here are there to report on the event, not helping the list's notabilities. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, American football, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of College World Series broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources consists of Google searches, dead links and not supporting this lists also, none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Baseball, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All trivial and can be summed up as a blurb in each article's appropriate media section. Conyo14 (talk) 20:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcos loyalist rallies[edit]

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

WP:NOT a repository of links. This isn't really an article, it is a statement and some links. I've approached the editor with some help on his talk page. Note there is also a Draft version by the same editor. The editor seems to have a history of just adding lists of links in articles rather than citations or prose. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 07:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 07:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Having an article of demos that routinely end without much incident is no more notable than having to tally other rallies by groups in other sides of the political spectrum. Borgenland (talk) 13:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Perfectly fine stub that helpfully lists sources that can be used for future expansion. The cited sources (including from The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and The Washington Post, so not just local coverage) clearly indicate that these demonstrations were considered notable at the time, and notability is not temporary. "Too many links" is not a valid reason for deletion and probably if they weren't there there'd be complaints about lack of references – it's a wonder people still bother writing articles. – Joe (talk) 15:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of NCAA Division I women's basketball tournament Final Four broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, entirely unsourced. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Basketball, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, with sourcing from [19], [20] and [21].
Delete per nom. The sources provided are about the ratings which can be a blurb in each Final Four article. However, media sections regarding which station, play-by-play, and color commentator is not necessarily notable to collegiate basketball (men's or women's). Conyo14 (talk) 20:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of WNBA Finals broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Entirely unsourced but a single one that is a TV listing, not asserting notability either. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Basketball, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Found these from 2023's: [22] and [23]. Conyo14 (talk) 21:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Divided Loyalties (novel)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NBOOK No WP:SIGCOV Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Literature, and England. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Poles killed during the Russian invasion of Ukraine[edit]

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

WP:NOTMEMORIAL, that Poles have been killed (and their number) can be mentioned on a general page about the role of Poland in the event, but a list of the individuals that died is no more warranted than lists of people who died in airplane crashes (or e.g. WWII). Fram (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Military, Poland, Russia, and Ukraine. Fram (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Many sources this article uses are unsuitable, such as Twitter and Facebook. I can't vouch for some of the Polish sources, as my familiarity with Polish media is limited. I can't see from the sources whether or not these volunteers are notable for anything other than having died in Ukraine either. If so, they should be mentioned on a different page. However, I'm not sure which one. Maybe International Legion (Ukraine)? Cortador (talk) 10:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Some OR concerns, sure. Does it meet NLIST? There is some media coverage discussing more than one person (so, group - a list) that may suffice for NLIST: [24] (Gazeta Wyborcza), [25] (pl:dziennik.pl), [26] (defence24.pl, no wiki article yet, but IMHO notable). And there is also coverage of related fake news that should be mentioned in the article ([27]). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Academy Awards broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Sources are nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Awards, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Pro Bowl broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. One of the source are causal mentions. Some are YouTube, if not dead links. Many others are nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, American football, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alyansa Bantay Kapayapaan at Demokrasya[edit]

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

Too soon. It's a newly formed group that has a couple of mentions, but is far from notable at this stage. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 07:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 07:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idolatrada[edit]

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

An article about a film that doesn't meet WP:NFILM. No SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Brazil. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Added a few things. Much more exists (see gBooks) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bamburgh Castle Lifeboat Station[edit]

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

No evidence of notability from reliable sources, the available sources are the publications of a lively hobby club. The station was relatively shortlived and nothing remarkable happened during these years. The main source, by Jeff Morris, has not received any attention at all[28] and is basically, as far as can be determined, a self-published booklet or brochure[29] Fram (talk) 07:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Transportation, and England. Fram (talk) 07:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep :As author of this page, I am saddened that it has been noted for deletion.
I accept that the main problem is the lack of source material, and that I have only one primary source. The station was only open for 15 years, and nobody was rescued, so there is little reason for other sources of information to exist; no newspaper reports of gallant rescues, no medal reports, etc.

But I refute the Notability claim, something which has been discussed with Fram, and in lack of response, thought he had agreed.

As discussed earlier with Fram...

The page is primarily referenced to the work of Mr Jeff Morris. An independent and enthusiastic man who dedicated most of his life to recording and documenting UK lifeboat stations, visiting them all, and recording in detail, every rescue, award, and lifeboat infrastructure, boats, buildings etc etc, before his death only a couple of years ago.

He also worked closely with the RNLI Heritage Team, with access to all their documents, and with Barry Cox, who documented all the RNLI medal awards. There are no finer reference works, and to say it is not useful for notability is quite frankly insulting. There is nothing anywhere else that comes close. His work is absolutely an independent source of some repute.

Jeff Morris didn't work for the RNLI, he was independent. He produced and funded booklets of his work, which he usually made available at the respective lifeboat station for them to sell and help raise much needed funds to run the service. Within the "small hobby club" of 2000 members that is the Lifeboat Enthusiasts Society, the booklets are treated as gospel. Does it need someone to have a proper published book with ISBN to be regarded as notable??

Bamburgh Castle Lifeboat Station is an innocuous page, it's not causing grief to anyone, it just presents the facts of Bamburgh Castle Lifeboat Station, few as they are. Even the old station building still exists. The station was one link in a whole chain of lifeboat stations, and just because it was only open for 15 years, with not much happening, doesn't make it any less valid than any of the other former stations.

I respectfully request that consideration for deletion is declined.

MartinOjsyork (talk) 09:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article is part of a body of such former lifeboat station articles, all geographically notable. It doesn't need to be deleted just because nothing remarkable happened. There are plenty of other places like that. Perhaps a wider search (e.g. British Newspaper Archive) would supply further sources. Tony Holkham (Talk) 10:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- What is "geographically notable" supposed to mean? Populated places (towns, villages...) are supposed to be notable, things like rivers or mauntains as well. But fire stations, police stations, libraries, ... are not automatically notable, and I see no reason to treat lifeboat stations any differently. Fram (talk) 11:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  @Fram
  
  I don't know where you are in the world, but I'm assuming not in the UK?
  
  People in the UK are mostly very proud of the volunteers of the RNLI, an independent organisation, who will risk all to save lives at sea.
  
  As a result, many folks visiting the coast will make a point of seeking out both current and former lifeboat stations, to pay their respects to the work that is/was done there. Something that they don't necessarily do for a police station or library.
  
  MartinOjsyork (talk) 12:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - But which, even if true, has nothing to do with being "geographically notable". Fram (talk) 12:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is clearly a notable station as it was the location for Lionel Lukin's original lifeboat and long-thought to be the first lifeboat station in the country. I've also added some additional citations from earlier sources so it is not so reliant on Jeff Morris's work. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Goodness gracious, no one arguing for keep is making policy-based arguments here, so I will. The Morris booklet is WP:SELFPUBLISHED and all the Life-boat citations are to WP:TRADES and all are ineligible to establish notability. However, there are other independent sources that should be added to the article and that validate notability per GNG: Leach, Alexander and Kelly, Drower and Ainslie, and this BBC item. That should be sufficient. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:07, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copa América Centenario broadcasting rights[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Football, and Lists. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Govvy (talk) 22:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NBOOK. One of the sources is WP:USERGEN and the other no longer exists. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Literature, and England. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard A. Miller[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Half the sources don't even make references to Miller, however there is this sources which does count towards WP:GNG (and was the only one I was able to find). GMH Melbourne (talk) 06:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Oklahoma. GMH Melbourne (talk) 06:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Miller's biggest claim to notability is his appointment to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board, a five member appointed state agency that is required to approve pardons. I'm not convinced either way whether that position meets WP:NPOL, but in a state that is doing more executions than most others the people in charge of determining whether to pardon those to be executed have some degree of notability. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 15:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yohanna Bako[edit]

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

Fails WP:NACADEMIC, WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:GNG. Sources are either song releases, PRs, promo puff from primary sources, or clearly not independent of the subject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 09:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific Reyada School[edit]

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

WP:UNSOURCED school with no good place to redirect. A quick search reveals nothing more. Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Jordan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:54, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The nomination is incorrect in that the school has a reference. When the article was crerated I believe this scraped through as a "Highschool" because it was judged at the time that such a school was inherently notable. Today I have my doubts. A diligent WP:BEFORE finds that some sources have potential, but do not meet WP:NSCHOOL. I choose to remain neutral in this discussion. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richmond College, Murray State University[edit]

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

Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization. ElKevbo (talk) 11:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regents College, Murray State University[edit]

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

Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization ElKevbo (talk) 11:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hester College, Murray State University[edit]

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

Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization. ElKevbo (talk) 11:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clark College, Murray State University[edit]

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

Subject is not independently notable - notability is not inherited from its unquestionably notable parent organization ElKevbo (talk) 11:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emaan Singh Mann[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL, subject was never elected in any of the contested elections, and fails WP:GNG too. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, Asia, and India. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of sportspeople with martial arts records[edit]

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

Could not find any reliable coverage of the overall topic. Appears to fail NLIST. At current, the page is a trivial list of names without much in the way of valuable information, so if sourcing is found then it will need an overhaul. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:12, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Lists of people. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:12, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lifechanyuan International Family Society[edit]

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

This article has had zero independent sources cited since it was created six years ago. I am unable to find any significant discussion of the organization in reliable sources. ... discospinster _talk 01:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Canada. ... discospinster _talk 01:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete'~~ There's a little bit out there on this company, but not from reliable sources. I can't see the full text of the Martin Boewe doctoral thesis; if it has RS citations perhaps that could save this article, but where those citations would come from is anyone's guess. As it is, it's possibly eligible for CSD G11 (blatant promotion).
keep per WP:HEY rewriting of article based on sources from @Cunard Oblivy (talk) 02:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lifechanyuan started from Zimbabwe when Xuefeng lived there and the 1st Second Home was built in Yunnan China so most of the theory(Lifechanyuan values) and introduction articles are in Chinese, with only a small portion of its theory and introductory articles translated into English, that's why the sources of the information is difficult to find.

Dr. Martin Boewe and his wife visited the 4th branch of the Second Home in 2012, during which they had an interview with founder Xuefeng, here are the links for his interview （1-3）:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZg4JWQwCzw&t=151s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKQ3e1_wjgs&t=17s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaiwPsSqt3k&t=360s

It is imperative to accurately convey what Lifechanyuan truly represents to the world, without misunderstanding or misleading the public. As a member of Lifechanyuan for nearly 18 years, I aim to share the truth based on the past 16 years of practice of the Second Home, spanning from China to Canada. Tongxincao (talk) 03:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If there are Chinese language secondary sources that meet Wikipedia's requirements for reliable sources, then you should offer them up here. A YouTube interview with the founder is not going to do it. Oblivy (talk) 04:06, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The more I think about this, the more I think there should be an article. But not this article. I found a single WP:RS article from the New York Times in 2014[30] but it's paywalled. Somewhere there's an interesting follow-up story to be told. Probably not one for Wikipedia until that story gets published but someone feel free to surprise me.
The article creator @Snewman8771 is a SPA which did just three things: create the article, wikilink to an article on intentional communities, and then two years later try to create an article about East Turkistan Republican Party which was declined.[31].
@Tongxincao your account was created on the same day in 2015 as @Snewman8771. He started editing in 2018 and then stopped, and you didn't start until 2023. [32][33]. Can you explain? Oblivy (talk) 14:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was in China from 2015 to 2022, during which I have very limited access to WIKIPEDIA, and our communities in Chins were always under monitor, so I was quite careful to get access to google and facebook etc. Besides I am not familiar with the rules and how do people add new items on Wikipedia, I think put a brief introduction for Lifechanyuan will not be a big problem for Snewman8771. So we didn't pay much attention on it as we are focused on the community establishment and safe existence in China at that time.

In Nov 2022, I came to Canada and after settlement, we plan to develop the society with our founder and members together. We are looking for some volunteers to come and help our work in Canada，so the introduction of society here in WIKIPEDIA is important and must be true and clear. Tongxincao (talk) 23:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of Wikipedia is not to introduce societies and organizations to the rest of the world, it is to document things that are already written about in reliable, third-party sources. Furthermore, some of the previous content in the article was highly promotional in tone, which makes it seem like you are trying to use Wikipedia's popularity to recruit new members. ... discospinster _talk 23:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply @User:Tongxincao. You should read the conflct of interest rules as you have a close relationship with this organization.
~~Can you clarify whether you were involved in the edits by @Snewman8771? How did it come that both accounts were registered on the same day?~~ Oblivy (talk) 23:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm uncertain about the detailed requirements of Wikipedia, and how reliable second sources are defined, but information displayed on it should be based on facts, avoiding conveying misinformation. I believe that is a fundamental rule. There are very few reliable second sources of Lifechanyuan in English, as it is a small group rooted in China, and only a few members are proficient in English. I can gather some sources in Chinese to verify the information, including English sources from Ecovillage network newsletters or reports from our sister communities, although some of their links may have expired or changed (though I have the PDF or JPG files). As you may know, the media in China is controlled by the government, and reports related to religion, belief, etc., including Lifechanyuan, are forbidden from being published. This has been ongoing for many years.

Lifechanyuan is based on all articles written by founder Xuefeng since 2001, totaling over 3000 articles. Only a small part of it has been translated into English, and it is not well-known to the public.

Here are some Chinese and English websites:

www.lifelvzhou.org

www.lifecosmos.org

https://www.facebook.com/chanyuancelestials

https://www.lifechanyuan.org

https://www.smcyinternationalfamily.org

The source of the article I used to edit the introduction of the Second Home life mode is: (you might need to register to see) http://lifelvzhou.org/bbs/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2937&highlight=%C8%CB%C0%E0%D0%C2%C9%FA%BB%EE

Snewman8771 joined Lifechanyuan and became a member in 2018, his member name is Kasi Celestial. In China, access to some internet platforms is restricted, making it difficult for us to reach out to Wikipedia or Facebook, besides the rule for editing WIKIPEDIA looks quite complicated for us. Snewman8771 offered to help edit, but as a new member, he was only familiar with a brief history and didn't fully understand our values and information. Due to communication challenges, we were unable to clarify, so we left it as it was. Now, I would like to revise and present it accurately to the public. Tongxincao (talk) 23:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why not just ask them ?? https://www.facebook.com/lifechanyuaninternationalfamily/ or https://www.smcyinternationalfamily.org 2405:9800:B910:819F:8F75:E8E3:1E34:197D (talk) 13:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Levin, Dan (2014-03-12). "Communism Is the Goal at a Commune, but Chinese Officials Are Not Impressed". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2023-03-24. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "Members of this idyllic utopian commune tucked away in the mountains of southwest China share an agrarian life that would probably have delighted Chairman Mao: Every day they volunteer six hours to work the fields, feed their jointly owned chickens and prepare enough food to fill every belly in the community. The bounty of their harvest is divided equally and apparently without strife, part of a philosophy that emphasizes selflessness and egalitarian living over money and materialism. “What we’re doing here is basically communism,” said Xue Feng, 57, the soft-spoken founder of Shengmin Chanyuan, or New Oasis for Life, whose 150 members include illiterate peasants and big-city corporate refugees. “People do what they can and get what they need.”"
2. Sigley, Gary (2016). "The Mountain Changers: Lifestyle Migration in Southwest China". Asian Highlands Perspectives. 40: 240–241. ISSN 1835-7741. Retrieved 2024-04-29 – via Google Books.
  The journal notes: "In Lincang Prefecture, a rural subtropical area in southwest Yunnan near the borders of Myanmar, Laos, and Vietnam, a group of 150 people from different walks of life came together to create the Shengming chanyuan 'New Oasis for Life Commune' (Levin 2014). This Buddhist inspired community sought to create a self-sustaining and spiritual alternative to what they regard as an alienating and materialistic society found in the sprawling cities of modern China. As is discussed further below, these people are drawing upon a long Chinese tradition of escape to the mountains for the purposes of solitude, meditation, and respite. What is interesting about the New Oasis instance is the choice of location. To have created such a community in Lincang before 1978, or even before 1949, would have been extremely difficult. Lincang is a border region that for most of its history has been inhabited by various non-Han minorities. It was a remote and often dangerous place for the unwary visitor, a place that James C Scott (2010) regards as part of a larger highland zone he calls "Zomia" that for much of history was beyond the immediate reach of centralized states. But times have changed and the once "remote" and "dangerous" places have now been made "accessible" and "tame." Unfortunately for the members of this community, the local authorities looked upon this religiously inspired endeavor with great skepticism and used various measures to make them disband."
3. Introvigne, Massimo (2022-01-01). "Religión, "sectas" y control social en la China de Xi Jinping" [Religion, "sects" and social control in Xi Jinping's China]. Revista Internacional de Estudios Asiáticos [International Journal of Asian Studies] (in Spanish). 1 (1). University of Costa Rica. doi:10.15517/riea.v1i1.49606. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "En la última parte del artículo, presento un estudio de caso del Templo Zen de la Vida (生命禅院, Life Zen Temple). Se trata de un movimiento idiosincrásico tanto por su insistencia en ser a la vez comunista y religio como por sus experimentos sobre el amor libre. También es un buen ejemplo de los efectos de los cambios legislativos y administrativos de Xi, ya que pasó de lo rojo a lo gris y, finalmente, en 2021, a lo negro."
  From Google Translate: "In the last part of the article, I present a case study of the Life Zen Temple (生命禅院, Life Zen Temple). It is an idiosyncratic movement both for its insistence on being both communist and religious and for its experiments in free love. It is also a good example of the effects of Xi's legislative and administrative changes, as he moved from red to gray and finally, in 2021, to black."
  The article notes on page 57: "El 28 de abril de 2021, a partir de la 1:00 de la madrugada, la Seguridad Pública y agentes de la unidad especializada en la lucha contra el xie jiao empezaron a hacer redadas en los dos asentamientos comunales del Templo Zen de la Vida (生命禅院, Life Zen Temple), situados en zonas remotas del condado de Tongzi y del condado de Anlong, en la provincia de Guizhou. A las 6:30 de la mañana, ya habían tomado el control de los dos locales, donde vivían unos 100 devotos de 13 provincias diferentes. Fue una redada clásica contra una “secta”, aclamada por la policía como un éxito total (he reconstruido el incidente basándome en los comunicados de prensa de la Seguridad Pública de Guizhou)."
  From Google Translate: "On April 28, 2021, starting at 1:00 in the morning, Public Security and agents from the unit specialized in the fight against xie jiao began to raid the two communal settlements of the Zen Temple of the Life (生命禅院, Life Zen Temple), located in remote areas of Tongzi County and Anlong County, Guizhou Province. At 6:30 in the morning, they had already taken control of the two premises, where about 100 devotees from 13 different provinces lived. It was a classic “cult” raid, hailed by the police as a complete success (I have reconstructed the incident based on press releases from Guizhou Public Security)."
4. Wei, Jing 魏婧, ed. (2021-07-27). "自称上帝使者，鼓吹性爱自由……"生命禅院"非法组织被依法取缔！" [Claiming to be a messenger of God and advocating freedom of sex... the illegal organization "Shengmin Chanyuan" was banned according to law!] (in Chinese). China News Service. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "中国网7月27日讯据中国反邪教网消息，自称上帝使者，鼓吹性爱自由，裹挟成员聚居，“生命禅院”非法组织被依法取缔！"
  From Google Translate: "China Net reported on July 27 that according to the China Anti-Cult Network, the illegal organization "Lifechanyuan" was banned according to law because he claimed to be a messenger of God, advocated freedom of sex, and coerced members to live in gatherings!"
  The article notes: "从2002年起，张自繁借用佛教、基督教、伊斯兰教、道教等宗教理论，并歪曲现实社会提倡的种种价值观，再糅杂一些心灵鸡汤，编造出一套唬人的“生命禅院”理念。之后，他又以“雪峰”为笔名，将这些所谓的理念集结成册，先后印制了《雪峰文集》《禅院文集》《新时代人类八百理念》等书籍。后来，这些书籍也成为张自繁对信徒实施精神控制的重要工具。"
  From Google Translate: "Since 2002, Zhang Zifan has borrowed religious theories such as Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, and Taoism, distorted various values promoted by the real society, and mixed in some chicken soup for the soul to concoct a set of bluffing "Life Chanyuan" concepts. After that, he used the pen name "Xue Feng" to collect these so-called ideas into books, and successively printed books such as "Xue Feng Collected Works", "Zen Yuan Collected Works", and "Eight Hundred Ideas of Humanity in the New Era". Later, these books also became an important tool for Zhang Zifan to exercise mental control over his believers."
5. "現實版1Q84：婚姻是痛苦根源" [Reality version 1Q84: Marriage is the source of pain]. World Journal (in Chinese). 2014-01-18. p. B3.
  The article notes: "香港蘋果日報報導，生命禪院的「理論基礎」是雪峰數十萬字關於人生的意義、36維空間、20個平行時間等論述，聽得人一頭霧水。唯一聽懂的其中一項核心理念：婚姻家庭是痛苦根源。 ... 「我們的情愛性愛是比較自由的！」從紐西蘭回國、年約30歲的雙胞胎姊妹顏渝和顏瑾，是生命禪院裡擁有高學歷的成員，她們在海外原本過著很好的生活、擁有良好的職業，但受這兒純樸的集體生活吸引，去年6月加入。"
  From Google Translate: "Hong Kong Apple Daily reported that the "theoretical basis" of Lifechanyuan is Xuefeng's hundreds of thousands of words on the meaning of life, 36-dimensional space, 20 parallel times, etc., which makes people confused. One of the core concepts I only understand: marriage and family are the source of suffering. ... "Our love and sex are relatively free!" Twin sisters Yan Yu and Yan Jin, about 30 years old, who returned from New Zealand, are highly educated members of Lifechanyuan. They used to live a very happy life overseas. I have a good life and a good career, but I was attracted by the simple collective life here and joined in June last year."
6. "「共妻淫亂」生命禪院被斷水電雲南「第二家園」性愛自由、人人皆「情人」成員改名換姓務農自足 3分院面臨解散" ["Shared Wife and Fornication" Lifechanyuan was cut off from water and electricity. Yunnan's "Second Home" offers free sex and everyone is a "lover". Members changed their names to work in farming and are self-sufficient. Branch 3 is facing dissolution.]. World Journal (in Chinese). 2014-01-18. p. B3.
  The article notes: "中國唯一自稱真正實施共產主義的社區─雲南省「生命禪院第二家園」，近日遭當局以「共產共妻聚眾淫亂」等理由取締，三個分院面臨解散危機。港媒近日深入該社區，發現區內雖推崇性愛自由、以女性為尊，卻沒有想像中的肉慾橫流，而是由失婚婦女與逃避社會壓力的年輕人等，以各自獨立又相互合作的方式共同生活。"
  From Google Translate: "The only community in China that claims to truly implement communism, the "Lifechanyuan Second Home" in Yunnan Province, was recently banned by the authorities on the grounds of "communist wives gathering together for lewdness", and the three branches are in danger of being disbanded. Hong Kong media recently went deep into the community and discovered that although sexual freedom and respect for women are respected in the community, it is not as sensual as imagined. Instead, divorced women and young people escaping from social pressure work independently and cooperatively. live together."
  The article notes: "香港蘋果日報報導，位於雲南的「生命禪院第二家園」成立至今四年多，園內約150名成員皆不得擁有私人財產，且放棄原本姓名，改用被稱為「精神導遊」的56歲創建者「雪峰」賜名，彼此則互稱「禪院草」。"
  From Google Translate: "Hong Kong Apple Daily reported that it has been more than four years since the establishment of the "Lifechanyuan Second Home" in Yunnan. About 150 members of the park are not allowed to own private property, and have given up their original names and replaced them with the 56-year-old "spiritual tour guide." The founder "Xue Feng" gave the name to each other, and they called each other "Zen Yuan Cao"."
7. "「婚姻是痛苦根源」" ["Marriage is a source of suffering"]. Apple Daily (in Chinese). 2014-01-18. Archived from the original on 2024-04-29. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
  The article notes: "雪峰告訴記者生命禪院的「理論基礎」是他數十萬字關於人生的意義、36維空間、20個平行時間等論述，聽得人一頭霧水。"
  From Google Translate: "Xuefeng told reporters that the "theoretical basis" of Lifechanyuan is his hundreds of thousands of words on the meaning of life, 36-dimensional space, 20 parallel times, etc., which made people confused."
8. "云南社区共产共妻性爱自由回归自然" [Yunnan community communism and wife sharing, sexual freedom returns to nature]. Nanyang Siang Pau (in Chinese). 2014-01-19. p. A23.
  The article notes: "中国云南一个自称是真正实施共产主义的社区，近日被官方以“聚众淫乱”为由，即将面临取缔。香港《苹果日报》记者近日采访这个推崇性爱自由、回归自然的“生命禅院第二家园”。记者发现，社区没有想像中的肉欲横流。官方指控的所谓“聚众淫乱”，其实他们是不鼓励一对一的爱情或性关系。生命社区第二家园创于2009年，在云南省共有3所分院。社区常驻人口150人，投入集体生活前要经半年考察，加入社区后可随时退出。"
  From Google Translate: "A community in Yunnan, China, which claims to be the real implementation of communism, has been officially banned recently on the grounds of "gathering people for lewdness". A reporter from Hong Kong's "Apple Daily" recently interviewed this "Lifechanyuan Second Home", which advocates freedom of sex and returning to nature. The reporter found that the community was not as sensual as imagined. The so-called "gathering of people for lewdness" that the authorities accuse is actually discouraging one-to-one love or sexual relationships. Life Community Second Home was founded in 2009 and has 3 branches in Yunnan Province. The permanent population of the community is 150. Before joining the collective life, a six-month inspection is required. After joining the community, you can withdraw at any time."
9. "三所分院常驻人口051人" [The three branches have a permanent population of 051.]. China Press (in Chinese). 2014-01-19. p. B5.
  The article notes: "生命禅院第二家园创于2009年，在云南省共有三所分院，常驻人口150人，年纪最大的87岁，最小的5岁。投入集体生活前要经半年考察，在网上交流，可随时退出。"
  From Google Translate: "Lifechanyuan Second Home was founded in 2009. It has three branches in Yunnan Province with a permanent population of 150. The oldest is 87 years old and the youngest is 5 years old. Before joining the collective life, you need to undergo an inspection for half a year, communicate online, and you can withdraw at any time."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Shengmin Chanyuan (simplified Chinese: 生命禅院; traditional Chinese: 生命禪院) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 00:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Cunard (talk) 00:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard well done as always bringing the sources. The difficulty I have with this article is the disconnect between what's in the page and what can be documented. Let's assume someone wants to do the significant revision required to eliminate proselytizing and otherwise unencyclopedic content. What would then be left would be three propositions:

there was a commune in Yunnnan in the late 1990's and early 2000s - well established, can almost get to notability with the NYT article but Apple Daily seems to be based on information the founder has provided to them, not independent journalism. I couldn't find the world journal articles but if they are just regurgitating A.D.... Nanyang Siang Pau maybe?
there was a crackdown - well established through Chinese media, can describe them based on Chinese media reports plus the Introvigne article. There's a bunch of unreliable media out there as well on this.
the founder moved to Canada and his organization continues to recruit members while he refines his philosophy and issues volume after volume of deep thoughts - notability not well established except through self-published sources and sources of questionable reliability

Oblivy (talk) 02:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is a good outline of the topics that could be covered in article. The article could also cover what Shengmin Chanyuan's followers believe since pages 60–62 of Introvigne 2022 discuss that. Cunard (talk) 05:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've done my part revising the article so it is based on reliable sources. I had to put in some primary sources just to bring the article up to date as AFAIK no reliable secondary source has mentioned them since they came to Canada. I'll change my vote to keep provided that the article remains objective.
One final comment - the article was created as Lifechanyuan International Family Society apparently following the rejection of Lifechanyuan at AfC. LIFS is the Canada reboot of the Chinese commune. The rebuilt article is about Lifechanyuan as a movement rather than the Canadian commune, suggest a rename to Lifechanyuan once this is finished. Oblivy (talk) 10:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Apple newspaper was in Hongkong and they are one of the medias resisting Communist Party, so they came and interviewed some members, but they were not reporting our community in an objective angle, they are using it to attack the Central government. And the official source claiming we were illegal in 2021 is the media from Chinese government.

The New York Times reported us in around the end of 2013 when we were facing the 1st disbandment from authority.

For the times and facts, there are some mistakes as well.

I appreciate your effort of investigating the sources and try to introduce in your way, but what it is is what it is, and what is fact is fact, this is not an academic content, cannot be edited by the way of only based on limited sources. On behalf of our society, we require to delete it, let people search and investigate, read and experience by themselves, but not by the limit information and reports from non-independant medias. Thank you. Tongxincao (talk) 00:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is neutrally written and sourced to reliable sources (except for two sentences appropriately sourced to the company's website and a press release that explains what the group's beliefs and its current practice). Wikipedia:Autobiography#Creating an article about yourself says:
Anything you submit will be edited mercilessly to make it neutral. Many autobiographical articles have become a source of dismay to their original authors after a period of editing by the community, and in several instances their original authors have asked that they be deleted – usually unsuccessfully, because if an article qualifies for deletion the community will typically do that without prompting, and an article won't be deleted just because its subject is unhappy with it.
Cunard (talk) 06:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your excellent work cleaning up the article, Oblivy (talk · contribs)! I really appreciate it! Cunard (talk) 06:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We hope this can be deleted because the information is not correct, objective, and complete, for example it says "couples sleep separately", this is so wierd in expression and will scare and mislead people. The truth is that everyone in the community is independent so there is no "couples" or "marriages" in the community. This will mislead people so much, therefore it will mislead the public seriously on what real Lifechanyuan is. Tongxincao (talk) 23:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please raise further content concerns about the article on Talk:Lifechanyuan International Family Society as those concerns belong on the talk page rather than at AfD. The New York Times article says, "Certainly, some aspects of the group’s structure and practices are rather unorthodox. Members are known as celestials, all property is shared, and couples sleep apart." The wording in the Wikipedia article is an accurate paraphrase of The New York Times article. Cunard (talk) 06:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pak Chol-jin[edit]

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Can only find passing mentions in match reports. Redirect to 2010 World Cup squad. Simione001 (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 14:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He has 36 caps for a senior national team and played in a World Cup. Anwegmann (talk) 00:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both irrelevant facts. There are no sources which prove notability in sport and as such the article should be redirect to 2010 World Cup squad or deleted. Simione001 (talk) 00:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Simione001: I just like to point out that he is listed at both 2011 AFC Asian Cup squads and 2010 FIFA World Cup squads, so redirecting to one or the other would effect the search feature if anyone looks the name up. If deleted with no redirect, people will be able to find his name in both the articles and not be directed to just one. Govvy (talk) 22:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Odd one because WP:NFOOTBALL has been removed from WP:NSPORT but according to the discussion at WP:NFOOTBALLNEW, Players who have played in, and managers who have managed in, any Tier 1 International Match as defined by FIFA was once the guideline for notability which this article meets. Orange sticker (talk) 11:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Orange sticker: - You are basing your keep vote on a failed proposal. WP:NFOOTBALLNEW was rejected. You mustn't make up your own keep/delete criteria. WP:GNG is very clear. Simione001 (talk) 23:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment not quite, the proposal was to change what was referred to as the current guideline (part I quoted) however all guidelines relating to football seem to have been scrapped for reasons I don't know. Might be a good idea to draftify this and similar stubs until the guidelines are clearer? Orange sticker (talk) 08:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GNG is the only criteria that applies. Its very clear. Simione001 (talk) 08:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Simione001: You've nominated over 100 articles in the past few months and they seem to near-exclusively target those from just North Korea - a much underrepresented country whose sources are very difficult to find / use / etc. This systematic destruction of a nation's football history is rather annoying. Why? BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because they are terrible quality articles with next to zero information about the individual. If you actually looked into it, there a quite a few North Korean players which pass WP:GNG so to say this is some kind of systematic destruction of North Korean football is laughable. Simione001 (talk) 23:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hum Honorary Phenomenal Serial Award[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Cannot find anything in a WP:BEFORE and the few references are basically just verification that they exist. CNMall41 (talk) 04:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, Awards, and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 04:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Security Academy (film)[edit]

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

I'm being frank extremely here, this article about a film doesn't meet out inclusion criteria for films per WP:NFILM. The sources aren't reliable except for two which doesn't meet the guidelines for verifiability per WP:SIGCOV. Same as that, the film have not done any significant thing and no review from reliable notable reviewers. If sources are found, pls ping me though I found none. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Police, and Philippines. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Philippines. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_Philippine_films_of_2022#October–December (where it is listed; just added a ref there).-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am fine with that! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_Philippine_films_of_2022#October–December per WP:ATD --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SafariScribe: Added references to the "Release" section. LionFosset (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Curran Oi[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Massachusetts. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Even before performing a WP:BEFORE search, I think the sources already in the article pass WP:GNG and certainly WP:SPORTCRIT. I added the last example to the fold.

JTtheOG (talk) 20:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hyon Jong-hyok[edit]

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 03:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sun Moon (film)[edit]

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

I came across this film to review at NPP. A general overview of it showed it requires cleaning up, I tried to do that but was caught up with off wiki life. I decided to take a research on the film and later to consider if there is any source or coverage. At the end of the day, we have an article that doesn't meet WP:NFP. The sources cited were also not WP:NFSOURCES as they weren't reliable or saying/reviewing anything about the movie.

I also tried WP:ATD, and I must say here, thst there is nothing here per WP:NFOE. Additional problem of lacking coverage. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: You have one independent review on the page by Richard Propes.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand@Mushy Yank, but they doesn't mean they're notable. Can you find a redirect if any? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. No, you're perfectly right. There's some coverage in Christian media about the production so that List of Christian films could be a target for a redirect. Maybe.... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evgenia Sergeevna Didula[edit]

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

Russian pop, ethno-pop and folk singer. The person does not meet the criteria for WP:MUSIC.--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 03:31, 2 May 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 May 2. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by James Harden[edit]

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

Another list of primarily indiscriminate trivia, which is a WP:NOTSTATS violation. Let'srun (talk) 02:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 02:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For reference, there's recent NBA-related AfDs Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Larry Bird, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Dwight Howard, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Carmelo Anthony, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Chris Paul.—Bagumba (talk) 07:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lyen Wong[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 02:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Cuba, United States of America, and Florida. Let'srun (talk) 02:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- I am unable to find anything approaching SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 20:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of sports teams nicknamed Titans[edit]

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

This is a grouping not discussed elsewhere, and fails to meet the criteria set by WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 02:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 02:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Trivia. Especially when high school teams were brought up, and then even middle school. Geschichte (talk) 18:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable grouping -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, also Wikipedia:Set index articles; no shared characteristic, only the name.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 01:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Findlay Warriors[edit]

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

No evidence of notability, no indepth references about the team, apparently unknown whether they even played a full season, and claims about becoming the Dayton Jets unsourced and unverifiable[34]. Fram (talk) 11:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Ice hockey, and United States of America. Fram (talk) 11:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added references to the page. The claim of them becoming the Dayton Jets comes from the main page Continental Hockey League (1972–1986) though where that was sourced from, or if its even accurate, I don't know.PensRule11385 (talk) 12:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: The added references don't support the notability of the subject, and it is very hard even to argue in favor of notability if there aren't even sources verifying the team's record. This should be redirected to the main Continental league article. Ravenswing 12:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - team record was in the Decatur paper. Received decent amount of coverage in it. I’ve looked at it before, but can’t now as newspapers.com is temporarily inaccessible through the Wikipedia Library. --Hockeyben ^{(talk -} ^contribs) 22:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happy to shift my view to keeping if actual sources providing significant coverage are cited. Ravenswing 18:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 15:06, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While newspapers.com brings up many fairly WP:Routine mentions: ([35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41]), I think it is worth noting that these are all out of town newspapers, and unlikely to report anything in depth on a one year team that was a bottom dweller of the league. I am unable to find a good archive of The Courier (Findlay), which leads me to believe that WP:SIGCOV is likely to exist, but is not easily accessible. But obviously, that assertion on its own doesn't hold much weight, and I'm not willing to definitively say it does. IceBergYYC (talk) 21:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: An analysis of the sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 02:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

War on I-4 (arena football)[edit]

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

Subject does not have the WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:NRIVALRY. The current sources are primarily from press releases and a search for sources fails to come up with much more than mere mentions from individual games. Let'srun (talk) 02:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Florida. Let'srun (talk) 02:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some decent coverage from the Orlando Sentinel, e.g. [42] [43] and [44]. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any coverage from non-local sources? Let'srun (talk) 02:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG. Another source: [45] ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 02:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kunguma Kodu[edit]

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

Yet one of many articles created in a spree by Rajeshbieee in violation of WP:NOTDATABASE. Although this film has a notable hero, I can't find third-party sources. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 10:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to List of Tamil films of 1988. Simple search did not show any reliable sources with any coverage enough to warranty a page. Film can be viewed on YouTube and we know it is there but reliable sources are not available. This is mostly the case with less known or forgotten films. The sources on the page do not have any coverage and are unreliable. RangersRus (talk) 14:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to V. Azhagappan#Filmography: or to the list mentioned. Not opposed to keep if sources are presented (opposed to deletion). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw: The article is still undersourced, but kudos to Srivin for adding more sources. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I reviewed the refs added and they don't support notability. They are just listings or such. Desertarun (talk) 09:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. This is an unusual AFD discussion as the nomination has been withdrawn but there is more support for Deletion than Keeping the article. Please review recent improvements to the article that have occurred over the past two days.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist for an evaluation of sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 02:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this still under discussion? I already said withdraw, per WP:HEY. Kailash29792 (talk) 02:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the withdrawal, there are extant deletion !votes. Personally I'd have closed it with another week having passed without input but a relist is a viable call. Star Mississippi 02:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. If the consensus isn't "keep", then "redirect" is better. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kailash29792, there is also more than one redirect target article suggested which might result in a No consensus closure. Closers should be deciding which target article is more appropriate. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Breen (human rights activist)[edit]

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

Contested PROD for individual who fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. WP:BEFORE search does not turn up significant coverage. Existing article is a WP:REFBOMB of sources that fail to demonstrate notability. Sources 1/23, 6, 7/9/11, 15 and 25 are non-independent press releases or official bios, 2, 3 and 19 are trivial mentions in long lists; 4, 10, 14, 21 and 28 32 are passing mentions in coverage of other topics, 5 and 8, 27, 33 and 34 are WP:INTERVIEWS and thus primary sources; 13, 16, 17, 20, 22, 26, 29, 30 and 31 are self-authored material by the subject. 24 does not mention the subject. Only 12 might qualify as SIGCOV, but we need multiple reliable sources with significant coverage. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Military, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Junior School[edit]

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

PROD countered. Per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, articles about primary schools are only kept if they can be shown to meet WP:NORG. That is not the case here. Indeed, this is an article about a kindergarten. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Kenya, and United Kingdom. Skynxnex (talk) 03:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep It is also a story about a UK-based charity. I added a few references. Hopefully just enough to save this story.Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 04:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Ruud Buitelaar.Tamsier (talk) 03:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - although happy to consider a suitable redirect. I'm sorry but there is just not enough information about this school, as is the case of the vast majority of junior schools. Yes, this one is a charitable venture. Lots of them are. There are now four sources on the page. I analyse these below (with the first SHOFCO source being the only one that was there prior to AfD). On my analysis we do not have anything that meets WP:SIRS. There is almost nothing we can actually say about this school in an article. Source analysis:

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Secondary?
SHOFCO [46]	SHOFCO is Shining Hope for Communities, US based, I think it is a charity, and with a focus on Kibera.	SHOFCO appears legitimate. I have not investigated too hard on that score because this source fails on SIGCOV	The link is dead, but it is dated April 2009, and archive.org has a copy of the article [47]. There is no mention of this school at all in the article.	As there is no mention of the school, this is moot.
Charity Commission [48]			An overview of the charity, Maisha Tust. Nothing about th school. The charity is small too.	This is a primary source.
Optima [49]		Fitzwilliam College Newsletter with news of an alumna, the school's founder.	There is a single paragraph telling us that Sarah Shucksmith, a former Geography student, founded this school in her gap year, and they are building a new school building. It's creditable, but it's not notable.	– It is reporting and this is primary per WP:PRIMARYNEWS. However, as I know people will want to claim otherwise, and SIGCOV is not met anyway, I'll leave that as undetermined. It does not change anything.
Rus Newton [50]	This is a WP:SPS - a blog is a self published source	– I have no reason to say the writer is unreliable, but this is still self published.	To be honest, this would be well short of CORPDEPTH, but I would give ground to this being a charitable work, not a corporation. There is a little information here from which a page could be written, but it really isn't much. A lot more is needed, but I'll give it a yes on this one.	y

Delete per above, and based on my own long-standing factors. This is a very small charity/school that serves 65 young people. Bearian (talk) 19:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed tax[edit]

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

I do not know much about taxes, but I believe this topic may already be covered by Lump-sum tax. I am not certain if they are actually redundant. What do you think? If so, I recommend a redirect to Lump-sum tax. HenryMP02 (talk) 01:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Economics. HenryMP02 (talk) 01:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:40, 2 May 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 no consensus‎. (non-admin closure) voorts (talk/contributions) 02:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Companies (Audit, Investigations and Community Enterprise) Act 2004[edit]

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

As far as I can tell, this law has virtually no coverage anywhere. Fails WP:GNG completely. Only references are primary sources. Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and United Kingdom. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 14:48, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Satisfies GNG easily and by a wide margin. The Act, also called CAICE, has significant coverage in many books and periodical articles in Google Books, Google Scholar, Internet Archive and HeinOnline. There is significant commentary on the Act in Halsbury's Statutes and Current Law Statutes [51]. That commentary, some of which is already cited in the article, is certainly an independent secondary source. This Act is, amongst other things, the law relating to community interest companies (CICs), which law is Part 2 of this Act, and the same thing as this Act. Accordingly, there are entire books about this Act: [52] ("Law . . . of Community Interest Companies"), and many entire periodical articles about this Act. James500 (talk) 18:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
None of the citations cover this specific act, they only seem to cover the more general field Community Interest Companies and seem to only mention this act in passing as a source for some of the information about the field. WP:GNG requires coverage, not citation. Allan Nonymous (talk) 00:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Halsbury and Current Law are entirely about this Act, and they are a commentary on the Act. Likewise Bishop's book contains extensive commentary on the Act. An Act is not a source of information. An Act is the law. To use your terminology, the Act is "the field". Those sources, and the many other books are not just "citations". You might as well claim that a book review was "just a citation" of the book being reviewed. James500 (talk) 00:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps more importantly, both Halsbury and Current Law (and other sources) also include extensive commentary on Parts 1 and 3 of the Act, which have nothing to do with CICs. So this article is not redundant to the article on CICs. Even Part 2 of the Act is not completely redundant to the topic of CICs generally (at least as opposed to the law of CICs), since that topic includes all non-legal aspects of CICs (such as the companies themselves, statistical information about them, and the economic and social implications of them). Part 2 is independently notable of CICs generally when you consider the number of non-legal sources that discuss CICs. James500 (talk) 01:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Voorts: The policy WP:RELIST says ". . . relisting should not be a substitute for a no consensus closure. If the closer feels there has been substantive discussion, and disparate opinions supported by policy have been expressed, but consensus has not been achieved, a no-consensus close may be preferable" and "While having a deletion notice on a page is not harmful, its presence over several weeks can become disheartening for potential editors. Therefore, repeatedly relisting discussions merely in the hope of getting sufficient participation is not recommended. In general, a discussion should not be relisted more than twice. When relisting for a third (or further) time, or when relisting a discussion with a substantial number of commenters, the relisting editor should write a short explanation either within the relist template, or in addition to it, on why they did not consider the current state of the discussion sufficient to determine a closure result." Therefore please provide the required "short explanation", or just close the AfD yourself, or allow it to be closed by someone else. James500 (talk) 02:04, 2 May 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.

Subhan Aliyev[edit]

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

NO GNG. Created for advertising and PR purposes. The article is submitted for deletion as there are grounds for its deletion.--Correspondentman (talk) 08:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This user's (Correspondentman) right to edit on Azerbaijani Wikipedia has been indefinitely restricted by administrators. --Araz Yaquboglu (talk) 05:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Law, and Azerbaijan. Skynxnex (talk) 17:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khalil Rahme[edit]

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Australian rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG. Participation-based SNGs were deprecated in 2022 and BLPs require strong sourcing. JTtheOG (talk) 20:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC) I am changing my recommendation to a redirect to 2021 Men's Rugby League World Cup squads#Lebanon. JTtheOG (talk) 01:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, Lebanon, and Australia. JTtheOG (talk) 20:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: World Cup quarter finalist, several references (though more needed), suggesting player has had/having a career in Australia's first and second tier. Article needs expansion. Mn1548 (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Played at the RLWC, nine sources, every line sourced.Fleets (talk) 16:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any WP:SIGCOV? JTtheOG (talk) 22:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to 2021 Men's Rugby League World Cup squads#Lebanon. LibStar (talk) 01:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ossanda Liber[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Sources mostly cover her in the context of her unsuccessful candidacies (of which in one she received 84 votes out of 109,350 cast). AusLondonder (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Conservatism, and Portugal. AusLondonder (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I translated this article into English from Portuguese as part of Women in Red. This page is much longer than Nova Direita, perhaps it could be merged. Moondragon21 (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Moondragon21 When you translate an article, please check it. The tables of election results had broken templates and looked a mess. I have commented out that code, so the tables now look tidier, even though they don't have a coloured bar for the party. PamD 07:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete an unsuccessful candidate not otherwise notable. SportingFlyer T·C 16:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think coverage of her activity as founder of the new party probably makes her notable. PamD 08:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A unsuccessful political candidate that is not notable enough. BlakeIsHereStudios (talk | contributions) 03:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: as PamD said being founder and president also makes me think she's notable

Prima.Vera.Paula (talk) 20:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how being the founder of a minor party which received 0.25% of the vote indicates notability. AusLondonder (talk) 23:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:25, 2 May 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 merge‎ to Martyr#Political people entitled as martyr. I see a rough consensus to Merge this article with the target article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martyr (politics)[edit]

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

Low quality article. Parent article Martyr already clarifies in the first sentence that the word may have a non-religious meaning. I propose a merge of this article to Martyr#Political people entitled as martyr and/or Martyr#Revolutionary martyr. Super Ψ Dro 13:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Religion. Super Ψ Dro 13:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have just seen that the article was first split from Martyr by its creator Scolaire [53]. This happened without there being any template requesting a split in the article [54] and without anyone else proposing this in the talk page [55]. By the way, another previous content fork of the parent article was already split and merged once [56] [57]. Super Ψ Dro 13:59, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is what is known as a bold edit; bold edits are encouraged on Wikipedia. I did say I was doing it on the talk page, per your link, and nobody had any objection. After eight years, I think we can say that WP:Silence and consensus applies. If consensus now changes, so be it. Scolaire (talk) 14:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. "Low quality article" is not a valid reason for deletion. Had you done a BEFORE, you might have seen titles such as Martyrs in the Making: Political Martyrdom in Late Medieval England, Politics of Death: The Cult of Nazi Martyrs, 1920-1939, Imre Nagy, Martyr of the Nation, or Heroes, Martyrs, and Political Messiahs in Revolutionary Cuba, 1946-1958. The article clearly fulfils GNG. --Scolaire (talk) 14:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I see no need to have separate articles for people martyred for religious reasons and people martyred for political reasons since the term still has the same meaning of persecution. The main martyr article still includes a number of political and other non-religious related examples, so if there's actually a distinction to be made, the split should be done more clearly. The book titles above can still be used in the main article. The main page has 30 times the viewers as this page, so why make readers go through another link for the full concept when length is not an issue? Reywas92^Talk 16:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I would agree with you that there should be a clearer split. Any mention of political martyrdom, including the Revolutionary martyr section, should be moved out of the Martyr article to this one, and just have a hatnote on the Martyr article pointing to this one. Scolaire (talk) 15:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - in sum, I don't see anything with the information, which is all factual and correct. The biggest problem is that it's sort of a fork. A lesser issue to finding appropriate sources, but simple internet searches would help. I will defer to others who might decide whether and where to merge this, or alternatively, to fix it. Bearian (talk) 18:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Bearian: Did you men to say you don't see anything wrong with the information? Scolaire (talk) 11:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Yes, I don't see anything wrong with it. Typo. I'm leaning'merge. Bearian (talk) 13:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Merge. Bearian (talk) 13:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, per arguments above. The article seems to cite nothing to establish that 'political Martyrs' are an independent topic. Instead, it consists of a few examples that the article creators think the term applies to. This is particularly problematic when applied to contexts where events in non-English-speaking countries are being described, since as the martyr article notes, terms translated to 'martyr' may be applied much more broadly than is generally understood through normal English usage. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To add to the above, I'd have to suggest that there are obvious problems with neutrality involved. Generally speaking, people tend to be described as martyrs by those who share similar views - and Wikipedia shouldn't be presenting such subjectivity as if it was objective fact. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:40, 2 May 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.

Gary L. Coleman[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN. PROD was contested with sources from IMDB and of relatives being added, which do not establish notability. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, California, and Pennsylvania. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOK Foundation[edit]

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

Normally articles like this do come with sources published by PR, and related. Firstly, the article doesn't meets an entry for WP:ORGCRIT. The article told us its based only or per sources, they only practice in Offs, Nigeria, perhaps a local community in Kwara State.

In general, I was looking for a redirect but both the founder and organisation seems to lack credible WP:SIGCOV where one activity is taken or published by one newspaper or there. I can term this WP:ROUTINE. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, and Nigeria. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The World Hates Jimmy[edit]

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

Article exclusively edited by the comic's author. Two of the four sources here do not seem to work, and the remaining few seem to be at best, unreliable media sources. It doesn't even have a books entry. Allan Nonymous (talk) 00:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Allan Nonymous (talk) 00:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forestville Hockey Club[edit]

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

Although this club has existed since 1905, I could not find significant coverage to meet WP:ORG. There's incidental local coverage from The Advertiser but nothing indepth to be WP:SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 00:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Australia. LibStar (talk) 00:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul B. Wishart[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:NBIO. The only coverage online is one New York Times article about his death. Clear friend a ^💬 00:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Military, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:NBIO/WP:GNG. NYT obituary. Profile in Chilton's Iron Age. Profile in Minneapolis Star Tribune. Significant coverage in Honeywell news items such as [58][59] and [60][61]. Jfire (talk) 02:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources identified by Jfire (and other RS available on archive.org). Definitely passes GNG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]