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

< January 27	January 29 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Anna Salter

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

Sourced by a few primary sources for over a decade. No indication of why she would pass NACADEMIC or NAUTHOR. I could only find one review of one of her books [1]. Her other book Prison Blues was nominated for an award that it lost, but there is zero reviews of it that I could find, so even a stand alone page for the book is not actually possible to write, assuming that the nomination could make the book notable. Badbluebus (talk) 23:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Psychology, and United States of America. Badbluebus (talk) 23:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I quickly checked the obvious suspects (Kirkus, Publishers Weekly, Google Scholar) and found seven reviews of her fiction and non-fiction books. Easy WP:AUTHOR pass. pburka (talk) 00:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Pburka. The reviews added are more than enough for a WP:NAUTHOR pass. There also seem to be at least half a dozen additional reviews on Google Scholar for her non-fiction book Predators. And she quite possibly has a case for WP:NPROF#C1 with a few of her books having four digit or high-three digit citation counts. MCE89 (talk) 01:27, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Air Force Knowledge Now

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

The article has no citations actually about the subject except for primary sources. Non-government/non-department of defense sources aren't about AFKN, they're about knowledge management. Fails WP:GNG. v/r - T P 20:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 20:07, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Management and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:10, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was the original author. This can be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cpoteet (talk • contribs) 01:59, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:04, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Penn

AfDs for this article:

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

Previously deleted article was for a namesake. This person fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 22:28, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Kenya. LibStar (talk) 22:28, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: per nom and similar to Ernest Buule, Satiender Sehmi, Dismus Onyiego, Michael Carr-Hartley, and Muharud Mukasa, all from the same editor FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:27, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This database is interesting, and it cites a source "EAWL" for a bunch of different things about his life they list. He also seems to have been a Kenyan government official who was the Secretary of the Board of Inquiry and Magistrate Third Class. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already brought to AFD so Soft Deletion not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mom Soth

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

Improperly sourced (by one external link to IMDB) article for non-notable actor. WP:BEFORE does not yield any reliable sources that verify notability. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Cambodia. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Rice People#Cast: a very significant role in a very notable film. If others wish to keep per WP:NACTOR (a lot of coverage about the film, including some on his role, exists), considering his appearances in the 3 shorts by Norodom Sihanouk, I am not opposed to the idea. If some judge that he meets WP:BASIC trough the various mentions of his role, also not opposed. -Mushy Yank. 21:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - only because I suspect there would be more sources in Khmer; unfortunately I don't know the best way to search for them, and the Khmer Wikipedia does not seem to have a corresponding article. Also I might consider that such sources are more likely to exist in offline rather than online form. I would also be happy, as Mushy Yank suggests, with a {{Redirect with possibilities}} to Rice People#Cast. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Johan Ferreira

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

I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from reliable independent sources to meet WP:GNG. There is this, although much of it seems like paraphrasing his own words ("He is also fully committed to...", "In the medium term he wants to...", "Johan has stated..."). Sources in the article are all press releases, primary sources, interviews and/or passing mentions of the subject. JTtheOG (talk) 23:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Engineering, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 23:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brad Crabtree

AfDs for this article:

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

No non-routine independent coverage. I hastily withdrew my last AfD because I thought that assistant secretaries had inherent/presumptive notability, but there is precedent against this, e.g. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce D. Jette (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrienne Wojciechowski. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Environment, and North Dakota. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG and doesn't pass WP:NPOL. SportingFlyer T·C 01:54, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already brought to AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Val Valentino

AfDs for this article:

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

Merge with Breaking the Magician's Code: Magic's Biggest Secrets Finally Revealed the article in it's current state does not appear to be notable enough for a separate article. A majority of the article about Valentino's role as the Masked Magician on the TV show. This issue was raised at a recent RM. Dr vulpes (Talk) 23:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Magic. Dr vulpes (Talk) 23:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brian D'Ambrosio

AfDs for this article:

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

Previously deleted in 2016. The same basis applies at this time: "The article fails to meet WP:GNG, WP:AUTHOR, or WP:BIO." In support of the present nom, the article subject requests deletion. See VRTS ticket # 2025012110000983. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 23:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mild oppose. Given that the "article subject" probably also created the article for self-promotional purposes, but now that he is facing a federal prison sentence he wants it removed, it seems he is wanting it both ways. At the time the article was created, he fought off an AfC rejection and then fought and won an AfD at the time. After material on his egregious behavior was added to what was, admittedly, a puff piece for a mostly self-published author, he already tried again as an anon IP (there are several anon IP edits, all geolocating to Sante Fe, New Mexico, where he is apparently living at this time, close enough that they could easily be a dynamic IP from the same location) to AfD the article [2], which resulted in @Cullen328: giving it semi-protection, and that only after it was reverted for a whitewashing attempt. On top of that, one of his anon IP posts put up distractors on articles about other convicted federal felons [3]. All that said, while I think if he was marginally notable before he became notorious, he is definitely notable now. The story was posted on the US DOJ page and was all over the Montana press: posting just a few examples now. [4], [5] On the other hand, If the article is deleted, I also recommend that it be tagged as a WP:SALT so that it doesn't just get recreated as another puff piece when he gets out of the federal pen. Montanabw^(talk) 01:33, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luther, Indiana

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

Appears to be a 4th class PO and not a settlement: there's nothing there and no mention in county history. Mangoe (talk) 21:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 21:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dhaka Viswavidyalay Patrika

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

Subject does not meet criteria for WP:NJOURNALS (journal is included in selective citation indices, indexing services, and bibliographic databases) and lacks independent sources to meet WP:GNG. Recon rabbit 14:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bangladesh and Academic journals. Recon rabbit 16:07, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Literature, Philosophy, Music, History, Law, Politics, Business, Religion, Science, Biology, Economics, and Social science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:21, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom.CharlesWain (talk) 18:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I note that WP:NJOURNALS states that "It is possible for a journal not to be notable under this guidance but still meet WP:GNG for other reasons", so failing WP:NJOURNALS is not necessarily a reason to delete. Also, WP:NJOURNALS#C2 says that "The comprehensiveness of the coverage varies by field, geography, language", and it may be the case that Bangla journals are not well covered. I found this article [6] that says that none of the academic journals published by the University of Dhaka are indexed by leading databases. Interestingly, the authors of that article did not have access to data about Dhaka Viswavidyalay Patrika / ঢাকা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় পত্রিকা during their research. I think that we would need to look at Bangladeshi publications (whether in English or in Bangla) to assess whether this journal might meet WP:GNG. Hopefully someone with such access will participate here. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:01, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does not look like this journal published by the University of Dhaka is indexed by any databases, from what MIAR tells me. ~~It may be the case that this is a candidate to redirect to University of Dhaka rather than deletion~~, as was the case for the Azerbaijan Journal of Educational Studies, the only member of Category:Azerbaijani-language journals, which redirects to Ministry of Science and Education (Azerbaijan). Recon rabbit 15:30, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: RebeccaGreen you are rigth that a journal can be notable even if it misses NJournals. However, in that case it has to be shown to meet WP:GNG and I don't see evidence for that either. --Randykitty (talk) 16:38, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the University of Dhaka.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Striking my previous recommendation to concur with Vinegarymass911 and recommending a merge to University of Dhaka. Recon rabbit 20:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2022–23 Kapfenberger SV season

AfDs for this article:

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

previously nominated as part of a bundled AfD which reached no consensus, largely as editors disagreed with bundling. Renominating on the same basis as the previous AfD, this article is incomplete, poorly referenced and shows no evidence of notability. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 20:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 20:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is one of those articles we can probably have - a quick look of Austrian newspapers shows the second league gets significant coverage - but it's also not sourced very well, which violates NOTSTATS on its face. SportingFlyer T·C 20:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SportingFlyer: can you share the significant coverage you found because I can't find much of it, it doesn't get regular match reports at kicker.at or skysportaustria.at, and given the league gets average crowds of around 900^[1] (a lower average than the National League North^[2]) I'd doubt it gets enough coverage to warrant club season articles. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 21:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just articles like this one, which isn't 2022–23. Average attendance isn't the issue, it's whether we can adequately source the season. SportingFlyer T·C 22:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pierluigi Manciniart

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

An apparently promotional biography for a minor non-notable artist. I find no evidence that he passes WP:NARTIST, and no evidence for that matter of passing WP:GNG. The sources are a website that lets artists promote themselves ("Sei un Artista in cerca di visibilità?"), a business network website that appears to accept user submissions, promotional items (not critical reviews) for gallery displays ([7], [8]), a defunct WP:SPS art blog and a page that does not mention him at all. I didn't find anything else in the WP:BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Italy. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No coverage found at all in news sources, Gsearch is the subject's website and social media. Does not meet notability for artists. Oaktree b (talk) 14:46, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
　　　All artist sources are notability from Google

Why you can say does not notabibity for artist from Gsearch ？

contradictory 115.39.131.25 (talk) 08:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your search. I am aware that if you use google search the most relevant results are sns accounts, thats how the algorithm works. It is true that the online resources are little at the moment, however not all sources appear on google. Books and some newspapers do not appear in google.

I still do not believe that the results of google search can define someones notability in the terms of Wikipedia. Denni045 (talk) 10:31, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your detailed explanation. I did delete the archived source and the non relevant one.

I understood that some sources might not be defined reliable or completely independent, but it is true that there are some sources that do fall into that category. There is a book by a notable Italian publisher and a newspaper by a notable Japanese publisher.

We are continuously trying find more notable and reliable independent sources that might improve the notability of the article, and we have some that are coming in the near future that follow Wikipedia's guidelines. Denni045 (talk) 10:39, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for artists, as evidenced by coverage in reliable sources. There is a book by Mondadori(an italian famous publisher) and a newspaper by Yomiuri Shinbun (a japanese famous newspaper), which discusses the artist's work in detail. Further sources will be added in the near future to improve the notability. Denni045 (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom. The book that was added appears to be a venue for artists to promote themselves (artists submit applications and some are "selected" to be part of the book). I am unable to find the Japanese newspaper article but a "gallery information section" seems like routine and/or non-independent coverage. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kornel Klopfstein-Laszlo

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

Non-notable Hungarian journalist; there are no WP:GNG-qualifying sources in the article or in a WP:BEFORE search. Contested PROD, so bringing it to AfD. Source analysis follows:

WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs: [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]
Work authored by Klopfstein-Laszlo and thus non-independent: [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24]
Brief mentions in media interviews about his website:[25], [26]
WP:PRIMARYSOURCEs like event descriptions, official bios, etc.: [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32]
Unreliable sources: an opinion blog, FamilySearch, the subject's school yearbook.
Source that does not mention the subject: [33] Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, and Hungary. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Considerations before making a decision about this article:

1) Referring to Klopfstein as a "non-notable Hungarian journalist" would be an inaccurate portrayal of his contributions. Beyond his research and advocacy work, Klopfstein has published hundreds of opinion pieces and news articles, reviewed by independent editors at Hungary's most widely read newspapers (e.g., HVG, Népszava, Mérce, Euractiv, Kitekintő, Stop.hu), as listed by Declemens1971. In addition, his articles have elicited significant responses from opposing political perspectives.

2) Among the trivial mentions listed by Declemens1971, several articles authored by Klopfstein's political opponents focus exclusively on his work. This highlights his impact on public discourse. To ensure an accurate evaluation, inviting a Hungarian-speaking editor with expertise in press freedom and human rights advocacy in Central Europe would be beneficial.

3) Declemens1971 identifies Civilek.info as an "opinion blog," which may stem from a lack of familiarity with the Hungarian media landscape and/or linguistic nuances. Civilek.info is a right-leaning online news portal with a separate opinion section.

4) Describing Klopfstein solely as a journalist overlooks the breadth of his career. In addition to journalism, he has a well-documented history of political activism, research, and advocacy.

5) Guidance is requested on verifying roles like protest organizer or political activist when not directly documented in mainstream international publications. Notably, Klopfstein has been quoted by highly reputable outlets, including The New York Times and The Guardian, where he is explicitly named as a protest organizer.

6) The phrase "brief mentions in media interviews about his website" misrepresents Print-it-Yourself, which is not a mere website but a social movement involving thousands of volunteers across Hungary. As a co-founder, Klopfstein has been extensively quoted in major international newspapers in multiple languages (Politico, The New York Times, The Guardian, taz.de).

6) Characterizing widely cited research papers from leading think tanks such as the Budapest Institute and Globsec as "non-independent" reflects a misunderstanding of public policy research. These papers are peer-reviewed and authored by recognized experts in the region.

7) As stated in the article, Klopfstein operates under multiple aliases, including Kornél Klopfstein, Kornél László, and Kornél J. László. Relying on a single Google search may be insufficient to identify WP:GNG-qualifying sources. Nevesnevtelenek (talk) 22:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DXKS-FM (CDO)

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

Fails the WP:GNG. Also a recreation of the soft-deleted DXKS-FM (Cagayan de Oro) (nomination), which should be the article title if this were a notable topic. Constant recreation by PH radio/TV editors suggests salting may be required of both titles. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 19:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Philippines. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 19:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Not seeing anything in a search that would help to make this reach GNG. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No proof of notability, fails WP:GNG. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 20:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bimbo Balogun

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

Non-notable jeweler, coverage is based on WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 18:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Nigeria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clop (erotic fan art)

AfDs for this article:

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

To put it simply, the fact that there exists an article for "Clop" on Wikipedia is unbelievable. Clop, as a subgenre of a subgenre of pornography, fails to meet any expectations of relevance or importance a Wikipedia page ought to have. This kind of page explaining a specific form of internet phenomena belongs on Know Your Meme. At best, it warrants a small subsection on a larger Brony or MLP-related article. If there's going to be an entire Clop article, there may as well be articles for Sonichu and Sneed's Feed and Seed. Patriot of Canuckistan (talk) 18:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Patriot of Canuckistan (talk) 18:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep the existence of an article being "unbeliavable" in your opinion doesn't mean it needs to be deleted. Fact of the matter is that the topic clearly meets WP:GNG and even received academic attention. Skyshiftertalk 19:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep as a defective AfD request. The entire reasoning is WP:IDONTLIKEIT that the article exists, with a handful of WP:OTHERSTUFF as well. The article is properly sourced and denotes a unique subgenre/subculture. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 19:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It has 17 sources, which ones do you have an issue with, or in which section? The FiM fandom article is already 170k bytes and around 10k words, I assume this was spun off as others felt there was enough sources for notability and that it would be too clunky as just a section on that page (see also other articles linked in the fandom section of Template:My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic). I'm also not sure I understand what you're trying to say is "unbelievable" here, there are a lot of articles about pornographic subgenres on here (see Template:Pornography). Ringtail Raider (talk) 19:23, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation, Sexuality and gender, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:45, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Textbook WP:IDLI, and we're not any kind of purity police; Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED and it would be best to just find another interest area here entirely if this one makes you uncomfortable. Nate • (chatter) 23:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tania Neill

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

Fails SPORTSCRIT. No references to SIGCOV, etc, etc. Jay Cubby 18:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Football, and New Zealand. Jay Cubby 18:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping to @Schwede66, who preferred I start an AfD. Jay Cubby 18:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - found this, this, and this, but coverage isn't independent or extensive enough to warrant keeping. Paul Vaurie (talk) 19:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 19:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isaiah Macwealth

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

Regurgitated press releases WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 18:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Christianity, and Nigeria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Wolf

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

Non-notable attorney. In my WP:BEFORE, I found mentions like this and this but they are not enough to pass WP:SIGCOV requirement. Gheus (talk) 17:51, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Washington, D.C.. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:23, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per above and WP:TNT. His work with PLI could be notable, but the formatting and peacock language makes rescuing this page into an article beyond my patience. Bearian (talk) 07:11, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that the absence of one's patience or motivation to rewrite a poorly written article about a notable subject is not, in and by itself, a valid deletion criterion, regardless of the popularity of the WP:TNT essay. Cropping a promotionally-written page down to a stub requires very little effort, and no administrative tools. Please focus on the notability of the topic here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahlem Arfaoui Tartir

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

Non-notable academic. Lacks high-quality secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 18:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Tunisia. Shellwood (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unless there are sources in Arabic that I've missed. She seems to have written two books, but they seem to be self-published and don't have any reviews that I can find. She doesn't have any other research activity (e.g journal publications, employment at a university) as far as I can tell, so no possibly of a WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NPROF pass. There's some secondary coverage but it all strikes me as likely paid/promotional coverage (e.g. [34] [35] [36]). I don't think the awards she's won are particularly notable either. So unless there's Tunisian SIGCOV that I've missed, I think she likely fails WP:GNG. MCE89 (talk) 01:41, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sundaraja Sitharama Iyengar

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

Obvious vanity article. Subject does not appear to be notable, and the article is written in a completely unencyclopedic tone. Ixfd64 (talk) 18:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Computing, and Karnataka. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:39, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. The article has been carefully researched and adheres to factual accuracy, providing verifiable information about the subject's contributions and achievements. While we understand concerns about tone and notability, the subject's impact in their field meets the criteria for inclusion based on widely recognized accomplishments, of the last 5 decades.

Regarding the tone, we appreciate your input and will review the content to ensure it aligns with an encyclopedic style, focusing on neutrality and objectivity. If there are specific sections you believe require improvement, we welcome detailed suggestions to enhance the article further.

Your insights are valuable, and we’re committed to maintaining the highest standards of quality and neutrality. Thank you for helping us improve! 2601:582:C000:72D0:2D34:5475:AA22:BF20 (talk) 00:44, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose the deletion of this page.

Dr. Sundaraja Sitharama Iyengar is a highly renowned computer scientist with a distinguished career spanning over Five decades.

He has made groundbreaking contributions to computer science, including sensor networks, parallel computing, and artificial intelligence. His work has been recognized globally, and he has mentored and guided countless students and researchers, many of whom have gone on to make significant contributions in their fields.

Dr. Iyengar’s contributions are not only academic but also practical, impacting various industries and shaping the future of computer science. He has been featured in prestigious media outlets, including World News, NY Times, Washington Times, ANI News, Press Trust of India, Times of India), and Deccan Herald, among others, highlighting his influence and impact.

This page serves as a valuable resource for readers to learn about his contributions, legacy, and the evolution of computer science. Deleting it would remove an important source of knowledge and recognition of his work.

I urge that the page be retained, and I am happy to help improve its tone or add more reliable references to meet Wikipedia’s standards. 2601:582:C000:72D0:6533:86E8:B6EB:2FBA (talk) 00:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Heavy citations pass WP:PROF#C1, fellow of IEEE ACM AAAS and AIMBE is a quadruple pass of #C3, and named chair passes #C5. The version as nominated was heavily promotional but WP:TNT is not in play because there was a better version to revert to from November 2024; I have done that and removed some other promotional material. It could probably use additional cleanup beyond that but WP:DINC. Also, to the anonymous editor above, your AI-written walls of text are counterproductive to the case. Please desist. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:22, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per David Eppstein, clear pass on WP:NPROF#C1, C3 and C5. Current version looks fine now that the promotional material has been removed. MCE89 (talk) 01:44, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Olorunsogo Oni

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

Cited sources are about the company, Quila Jewelers and they are mainly based on paid coverage or press releases (WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA). Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 18:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:47, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cherinet Hariffo

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

Non-notable person, fails WP:GNG. There is also a history of promotion/COI [37], [38], [39]. Gheus (talk) 18:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Ethiopia. Shellwood (talk) 18:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yehoshua Elitzur

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

WP:BLP1E - this person is not notable except for their conviction. WP:CRIMINAL applies. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, Israel, and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve article. WP:CRIMINAL states that criminals need not have separate WP pages *except* for when "[t]he motivation for the crime or the execution of the crime is unusual—or has otherwise been considered noteworthy—such that it is a well-documented historic event. Generally, historic significance is indicated by sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage and devotes significant attention to the individual's role." This subject appears to fit into the above exception; Elitzur is mentioned in Times of Israel, Haaretz, Jerusalem Post, JTA, Middle East Monitor and Yedioth Ahronoth (Israel's largest newspaper). A film has also been made about the subject. Hence, no reason for deletion. Eelipe (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or rename to Killing of Sael Jabara a-Shatiya (he was convicted for manslaughter not murder). There is a lot of coverage of the event, passing WP:NEVENT, but with the way is covered it might make sense to keep it on the perp. It is a poor stub and should not have been made in this state but from a search it is notable. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. Additionally, the page lacks context, making it unhelpful to users. gidonb (talk) 02:49, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Master Plan (Chris Brooks album)

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

Self published album by artist I have also just submitted to AfD. Can't find any reviews or mentions of album nor artist. Orange sticker (talk) 17:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. Orange sticker (talk) 17:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (or redirect to the musician if he happens to survive his own concurrent AfD). I can find no reliable pro reviews of the album or other commentary, with only a basic listing at AllMusic and occasional mentions at various prog rock directories. Prog Archives has a review but it has lots of typos and probably no editorial oversight. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Brooks (guitarist)

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

No independent sources, books and albums all self-published, does not meet wp:gng or wp:musicbio. Been templated for improvements since 2016. Orange sticker (talk) 17:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also an AfD for one of his albums at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Master Plan (Chris Brooks album). ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Orange sticker (talk) 17:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I hope he has made an honest living doing what he loves, but he simply has not earned significant and reliable coverage about his career. He has gotten some invitations to make guest appearances in other people's albums but has not progressed being basic listings in the credits. I cannot find reliable pro reviews for any of his albums; where the article says that the albums received "Press coverage" in various magazines, those were probably just release announcements. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sellvia

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

Fails WP:NCORP, sourcing entirely consists of press releases. Brandon (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, and California. Brandon (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Movement for Quality Government in Israel

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

I hate to nominate this for deletion as it is undoubtedly a notable group, but this page seems to be getting more and more uncited information added to it. I propose a the mainspace article for this to be deleted (WP:TNT) with the current page draftified. Thoughts? GnocchiFan (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Israel. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:47, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gianmarco Tocco

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

Notable media sources unavailable, article indicates that it's notable for a record Twitch viewers (which doesn't seem to be enough to demonstrate notability). WP:NBIO fails. Bexaendos (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Italy. Bexaendos (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He’s not merely a Twitch streamer, but also a well-regarded public figure throughout the Italian-speaking world, having set world records on Twitch. Additionally, he serves as the president of one of the teams in Gerard Piqué’s Kings League. Slancio2 (talk) 18:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ram Reifen

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

No evidence of notability per PROF. The claim to fame is about chickpeas and this is the best "secondary" source--a page from a website called "VegNews". Please feel free to peruse the history, where you will see that I have been scrubbing the kind of directory entries and websites that are part and parcel of these promotional resume articles--this one produced a paid editor, and then edited by someone now blocked for paid editing. Drmies (talk) 16:43, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Israel. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:55, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Makin' Time (band)

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

This is the page for a 1980s British rock band. It's been tagged as unsourced for nearly eight years. None of their recordings appear to have made much of an impact on the music charts, and only one member went on to have any success (bassist Martin Blunt, who founded The Charlatans but does not have his own Wikipedia page). I've found a brief mention in an online fanzine, and a review of one of their album reissues, but nothing that would meet the criteria listed at WP:BAND. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:51, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:56, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A search has identified a number of secondary articles in reliable sources including a feature article and album reviews. Citations have been added to the article. Subject appears to be meet WP:MUSICBIO#1. ResonantDis_tortion 23:42, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the article has been substantially improved since nomination using references showing significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such as Melody Maker, Record Mirror, Music Week and others so that WP:GNG is passed in my view, Atlantic306 (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Close to achieving consensus in my opinion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 16:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

V. Irai Anbu

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

Promotional article about a chief secretary in a state government. Not important enough for an article. 🄻 🄰 20:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, India, and Tamil Nadu. 🄻 🄰 20:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
keep This person is obviously notable. Adeline2018 (talk) 14:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a promotional article. He has been a popular figure in Tamilnadu among youngsters, as a motivational speaker and also has been a key bureaucrat in Tamilnadu for years so nothing wrong in having a page for him. Maybe we can reduce the contents in the page but not a promotional page for sure. Vishwa Sundar (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the page has been getting more than thousand views per month which shows people look this article to know more about him. So we need a reliable source for people who want to know about him Vishwa Sundar (talk) 21:50, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's clearly not a valid reason for keeping the article. Badbluebus (talk) 14:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notable, but the article is promotional and needs cleanup. - The9Man ^Talk 07:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the list at Chief secretary (India), most of them do not have an article. Why is this one different? 🄻 🄰 11:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We don't arrange notability by subtraction. If you are concerned you are welcome to add articles for these people. Adeline2018 (talk) 14:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Adeline2018 (talk) 14:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

— Duplicate !vote: Adeline2018 (talk • contribs) has already cast a !vote above. (striking duplicate vote Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 14 January 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Comment - when the work has been done to fix the issues identified, then we can consider WP:HEY. As is my usual practice at AfD, I won't !vote until the rescue is done. Bearian (talk) 15:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak keep~~: I've gone ahead and removed most of the article as promotional and unsalvageable. There's enough material in Google News that the subject seems to me to pass WP:GNG. --Richard Yin (talk) 02:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed the coverage in Google, most of it seems to be only mentioning him in the context of being chief secretary and the rest seem to be WP:NEWSORGINDIA. What are you seeing? 🄻 🄰 14:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Upon a closer look at the news sources I think you're right. I don't like the idea of disregarding a large country's news media, but it does seem like most of the articles that cover the subject in any detail are either puff pieces or summaries of press releases. I'll strike my vote and switch to delete. --Richard Yin (talk) 05:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as editors arguing for a Keep are not basing their statements on policy or sourcing. Few people are "obviously notable" and this one isn't or the article wouldn't be nominated for deletion consideration.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Seems to be an author now, [40], although that's more of an interview. This [41], Oaktree b (talk) 00:21, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the cruft has been removed, but I still don't see significant coverage after I asked for it to be place in the article. I'm persuaded by the deletes. Bearian (talk) 05:29, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is tricky. This individual was formerly the highest-ranking executive official of a province more populous than any European nation. He comfortably meets the spirit of the statewide office criterion in NPOL, in my view. That said, all I can find is announcements of positions he has held, and promotional fluff like this. To write a biography we need biographical material that can be reliably sourced, even if we exempt this from GNG, as I think we can. If all we can say about him is that he held the position of Chief Secretary, this should be an entry in List of Chief Secretaries of Tamil Nadu...except that doesn't exist. As such I come down as a weak keep, preferring a PERMASTUB to complete deletion, but if someone were to create such a list I would prefer a list entry over a one-sentence article. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't the spirit of the statewide office criterion apply to the chief minister or governor of an Indian state rather than a secretary? There is a list on the chief secretary article and out of 28 states, only three have articles. 🄻 🄰 20:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've already !voted above, but how would people feel about a redirect to Government of Tamil Nadu until more source coverage is available? --Richard Yin (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: to give time for consideration of the redirect proposed in the last comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Government of Tamil Nadu or Delete. This had my head ringing and after careful analysis of the page and everyone's input, either one of these option qualifies (imo). Opposed to keep. RangersRus (talk) 17:20, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As Liz has stated, the people who have voted for keep have not referred to any policy or guideline and instead on personal opinion (which is fine when paired with policies).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 16:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

William Stafford Jones

AfDs for this article:

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

WP:BLP1E and fails WP:NPOL, exclusively known for minor political scandals, we have no article on the event to redirect to. He is a WP:BLP so there are extra problems in this article consisting of criminal allegations for which he was never convicted - and there is nothing else, and the allegation sourcing isn't even strong. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:55, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:55, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't see what the keep !voters in the last AfD saw - this seems like a negative WP:BLP article about a relatively unknown person, albeit one who was in a position of power. SportingFlyer T·C 22:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there are sources spanning 9 years, so BLP1E doesn't apply. There was an exception to that exception: when Jimmy Wales would get involved to protect marginally notable office holders. Bearian (talk) 15:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All the mentions prior to the 1E are extremely brief or passing, so it is still a BLP1E case. And again, this is a BLP based entirely on unproven negative allegations. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even then he doesn't really pass GNG - he's an unelected local politician. I don't agree with the source analysis of the previous AfD, either - they aren't really significant coverage of him but just discuss his role in local proceedings. SportingFlyer T·C 16:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Agree with Bearian's position on this AfD. Onikaburgers (talk) 19:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not my forte as of now so I will relist instead of commenting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 16:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

leaning delete I'm having a hard time seeing how there is anything left of this guy's article once you scrub it of "the only reason anyone cares about him is that his opponents claim he has done all this supposed law-breaking which haven't been proven in court." Mangoe (talk) 21:57, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Gibson

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

Does not meet WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR. There is no secondary source coverage of this individual. Cites his own self published works, sites, social media as a source. Zenomonoz (talk) 23:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and Australia. Zenomonoz (talk) 23:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete His book D might possibly be notable - there's a review in the Sydney Morning Herald [42] and one in Aurealis (that's referenced in the article). According to Austlit, there's also an article or review in The Australian: 'First-Time Author on a Fast Track to Fame' - though that may be one of his "media appearances", rather than a review. But there does not seem to be coverage about him, and with only one published book, he doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It has almost passed the 7 day threshold without gathering that much discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 16:08, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ilia Stambler

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

Highly promotional article whose references are almost all primary--the subject's resume, their publications, or the longevity websites they seem to be running. Two books, that's promising in terms of WP:PROF, but they are self-published and really not a in a good way: see this one. Instead of references or reviews, then, we have spam links, and maybe one independent reference--but this is pretty lousy, in a publication that doesn't inspire much confidence. In addition, the article was created by a now-blocked sock (blocked by Spicy but I can't tell if G5 applies. Drmies (talk) 16:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Israel. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eitan Okun

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

I don't see any proof that the subject is notable per WP:PROF, and the news coverage really is a single event. Note: creator was blocked as a sock by Spicy, but I don't know whose sock they were and whether G5 applies. Drmies (talk) 16:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Israel. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A user who edited the article has been blocked. But the creator Eliezer1987 (talk · contribs) is not blocked? Geschichte (talk) 21:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Susan M. Campbell

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Susan M. Campbell (2nd nomination)

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

General notability guideline(/WP:BASIC) -- lack of secondary/independent sources + no significant coverage. Doesn't appear to meet notability guidelines for academics either. Comment(s) on talk page show that verification of any information is an ongoing issue. Tagged for peacock, advert, and tone since Feb 2010. I tried to fix the issues prior to filing this AfD. Puppies937 (talk) 15:45, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:03, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no significant coverages and faiis WP:GNG. Anktjha (talk) 18:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. A search brings up no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. All the sources cited in the article are closely related to the subject. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 21:08, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sign Language (song)

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

Bad WP:INCDAB, but renaming it to Sign Language (disambiguation) would leave a dab page with two entries that are barely list-mentioned on the target articles, i.e. they don't really seem to pass MOS:DABMENTION. Should this dab page even exist? – sgeureka ^t•c 15:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Disambiguations. – sgeureka ^t•c 15:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Upon further research, "Sign Language" is also the name of a 2009 studio album by Blueprint (rapper), and a 2016 song by Vistas (band). Additionally, there's this band called "Sign Language" with one of their albums passing WP:MUSICRS but no article yet. Would support renaming DAB to Sign Language (disambiguation) Zinderboff (talk) 18:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move/Rename to Sign Language (disambiguation), and expand to include these two songs plus the other stuff found by the previous commenter, plus any other pop culture items that may be relevant. I agree with the nominator's reasoning on why this page does not qualify for WP in its current state. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Horelica Tunnel

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

Stub doesnt meet SIGCOV, can be merged into D3 motorway (Slovakia) article Soybean46 (talk) 14:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Slovakia. Shellwood (talk) 15:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stephan Matthai

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

Falling short of Wikipedia's notability guidelines for academics Cinder painter (talk) 14:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 15:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oko sveta

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

Non-notable TV news programme from defunct broadcaster. I could not find any sources that mention it by an English-language search on Google Search, Books & News. The title appears to be the Serbian for "around the world" and all the references I saw were to the Jules Verne book or other unrelated matters. The Serbian interwiki link is to a completely unrelated DVD and was added by a bot. The only relevant 'external link' appears to be the website of the ~~producer~~ EDIT: TV station (the website is gone and their Twitter account hasn't been updated since 2012, so I suspect they no longer exist) and this article was started by a user with the same name as the person it says presents the programme, so it appears to be self-promotion. The same user included borderline WP:PROFRINGE content (if the programme was notable in itself, and it was sourced, describing their editorial line would be legitimate & helpful, but neither of those things is true). It would be helpful if someone who reads Serbian (or one of Vojvodina's 5 other official languages) could check for sources though. Matt's talk 14:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. Matt's talk 14:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Matt's talk 14:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I should also mention that it's now orphaned because I just orphaned it. There was a media section in the Vojvodina article that seemed to exist purely in order to de-orphan this article, so I merged it into the Culture section. Matt's talk 14:26, 28 January 2025 (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/2025 January 28. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:49, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Functional Decision Theory

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

No evidence of notability. Article is based around preprints and blog posts - the RSes are not actually about FDT. A call for RSes on the talk page produced nothing. The article needs RS coverage specifically about the topic - David Gerard (talk) 13:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Logic, Philosophy, and Mathematics. David Gerard (talk) 13:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yet another example of the fact that little blue clicky linky numbers do not an article make. We can't base an article entirely on preprints and blog posts. (LessWrong is a group blog without editorial review, Medium is a blogging platform, etc.) A paper from 2007 can't contribute to the wiki-notability of an idea introduced 10 years later. A paper from 1979 is likewise background at best. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article that is currently reference #3 makes no mention of FDT, Yudkowsky, or Soares. The 2017 preprint is, well, a preprint on the arXiv, i.e., a self-published source that is primary and the opposite of independent. There are very, very few cases when we can use unrefereed arXiv preprints as sources for anything. For example, we could probably get away with citing John Baez's This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics [43] as a convenience link for a well-known, standard calculation regarding an established topic, so that readers would have an option that is easier and cheaper to get than a doorstopper textbook. But we couldn't take a topic that Baez invented on his blog and write a whole article about it; the fact that he has written other things that establish his subject-matter expert status would be insufficient justification. Searching for sources that are non-primary, reliably published, and providing significant coverage turns up nothing. The best that the literature offers is passing mentions: In response, various other one-boxing theories have been developed (see, e.g. Gauthier 1989; Spohn 2012; Poellinger 2013; Levinstein and Soares 2020) [44]. The closest approach to a usable source is the 2021 monograph by Ahmed on evidential decision theory which notes that FDT has been proposed as a competitor but concludes that it is not a fully baked theory yet: How best to spell this out is not yet clear; there is currently lack of clarity surrounding the counterfactuals at the heart of FDT. (The fact that the Functional Decision Theory article right now doesn't make clear that the best available source says that FDT has yet to be developed in a mathematically rigorous way makes this article a violation of NPOV.) Perhaps those brief remarks could be scraped together to justify a few lines in another article, to which this could be made a redirect. That would probably involve improving the decision theory article, which currently doesn't explain either causal or evidential approaches (leaving them to languish in the "See also"). Perhaps an "Other" subsection could be crafted that summarizes the various proposals and counter-proposals in this area. XOR'easter (talk) 18:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I've taken the comment above and deleted the deprecated sources. Much of the article is seen to be without reliable sources. This shows that the article is (and was) poorly cited. The question before us is, however, whether FDT is notable, through the existence of sources in the world (not in the article). A search indicates that the term certainly exists within academia. However, many of the sources are arxiv.org preprints or ResearchGate or own-university self-publications, which do not confer notability. There are some reputable sources which at least mention FDT. What I'm not sure of is the existence of multiple, reliable sources that substantially discuss FDT. If you know of such sources, feel free to list them below and I'll change my !vote. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:28, 28 January 2025 (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.

2024 Orbic Air Eurocopter EC130 crash

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

Non-notable aviation accident; though it resulted in six fatalities and no survivors, it doesn't meet the notability for events. Helicopter accidents are also common in aviation. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 13:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 13:04, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 13:04, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 13:05, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: The crash itself is run-of-the-mill from an aviation point of view, and fails WP:EVENT in particular due to the lack of WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE beyond the initial news cycle, and lack of WP:LASTING effects. There are however some details that could be usefully merged to the articles of one or both of the notable people killed in this accident: Herbert Wigwe and Abimbola Ogunbanjo. After the merge, I'd suggest redirecting to Herbert Wigwe § Death as he seems to be the more notable of the two. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Transportation. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I entirely disagree with the nom and the merge !voter. This is a clear-cut WP:GNG pass, WP:NEVENT aside, evidently from the sources and from a cursory search. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•Keep Per above, are we just purging aviation accidents and incidents in 2024? Lolzer3k 21:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the nominator unfortunately was before being blocked. - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 17:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep TG-article is currently blocked, but they may need to be banned from starting AfDs. There's a pattern here and it's getting ridiculous. SportingFlyer T·C 23:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT – Addressing the possibility of a merge, I think that any relevant information included in this article is already included in Herbert Wigwe and Abimbola Ogunbanjo. – Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". None of the sources, in addition to coverage about a lawsuit, are secondary since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself, with none of them providing significant or in-depth, continued coverage of the event with the coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:46, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator is currently blocked for what looks like a confirmed sock. – The Grid (talk) 14:31, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. But in this particular instance I think their nomination was justified, and their block shouldn't affect the outcome. For the avoidance of doubt, I stand by my merge vote (though on second thoughts I'd also back outright deletion, in that the utility of keeping a redirect is minimal). The only thing notable about this accident is the presence of notable people on board. Even if one admits that it could pass GNG on that basis, a merge still makes sense per WP:NOPAGE. Rosbif73 (talk) 15:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above, and article meeting WP:GNG, but also the nominator's current block should at very least allow this article to be closed with no consensus. - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 17:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erica Collares

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

All sources are unreliable or don't demonstrate notability. GNG is not met. Skyshiftertalk 14:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 15:39, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no indication of notability. Anktjha (talk) 18:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The nominator should explain why the references are unreliable. Several seem to be mainstream news media. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:31, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The few "mainstream" ones do not give significant coverage while the other ones are merely blogs. Skyshiftertalk 20:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gito Sales

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

All sources are unreliable or don't demonstrate notability. GNG is not met. Skyshiftertalk 14:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 15:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no indication of notability. Anktjha (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alireza-Jadidi

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

Non-notable musician. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 14:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Music. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 14:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Alireza Jadidi is one of the pioneers of instrumental music and electronic dance genre in Iran, isn't that remarkable? If you do a little research, you will realize that Iranian music has many limitations and the style of instrumental music in it is very limited. I ask you to reconsider your decision and remove the delete tag. Vikworker8 (talk) 14:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alireza Jadidi is one of the notable musicians in Iranian music because he is one of the few Iranian musicians who works in the genre of electronic dance and instrumental music, and his aim is to include styles that are called western styles in Iranian music. Vikworker8 (talk) 14:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:49, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arlyson Lanoa

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

All sources are unreliable or don't demonstrate notability. GNG is not met. Skyshiftertalk 14:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Arts, and Journalism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comitê Nacional de Arte Brasileira

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

None of the mentioned sources are reliable or demonstrate notability. GNG is not met. Skyshiftertalk 13:57, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The creator Wilbr2003 has added false information regarding the organization to multiple articles [45] [46] [47]. They also created articles for some of its supposed members which are also in AfD. Skyshiftertalk 14:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The nominator should explain why the references are unreliable. Several seem to be mainstream news media. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
None of them are mainstream, and that's clear when you look at the sources. They are blogs or databases. Skyshiftertalk 20:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Summer Fields School, New Delhi

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

Completely unsourced article about a school. As always, schools are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on their sourceability. But this cites no sourcing at all, the only footnote that's ever been in it in the past is its own self-published website about itself rather than GNG-worthy coverage, and it's written more like the "what to expect if you choose our school for your child" profile that one might see on the school's own website than like a proper encyclopedia article. Bearcat (talk) 13:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and India. Bearcat (talk) 13:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sunil Ambalavelil

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

The majority of the sources are merely passing mentions, quotes from the subject, or PR content. There is no significant coverage from multiple independent sources. The Mangalore Today article, which appears to provide substantial coverage, is a promotional piece focused solely on promoting the subject. No other sources were found that offer significant coverage. This article fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. GrabUp - Talk 13:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, United Arab Emirates, and India. GrabUp - Talk 13:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Dear Fellow Editors, Pls note under the Advocates Act, 1961, and Rule 36 of the Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette set by the Bar Council of India (BCI), Indian lawyers are explicitly prohibited from directly or indirectly advertising themselves. if they do that..... they will face dispensary action because of that. They cannot use bold claims, testimonials, or comparisons to promote their practice. since Sunil is an Indian lawyer i don't agree that that his articles are paid ones since he is not legally allowed to promote himself directly or indirectly. I am sure that this article Mangalore Today was written maybe for recognition and are independent from the subject and are not paid due to the laws set for Indian lawyers by BCI. He does have 2 other significant reliable source coverages as well (Mangalore today is not the only significant coverage) - A news article written in Outlook India and Page 10 of Calameo is also there as well. all the sources were written by the writers of their respective news publication house, there is no mentioning about any disclaimer or PR (which is also illegal for an Indian lawyer to do it according to India's Law). maybe it is just the way how those writers wrote those articles that does not mean that they were paid to do it from sunil other references where there is good amount of coverage include is this - [48] [49] [50]

Other than that, to support other aspect of his notability Sunil has won notable awards as well like the best Indian lawyer award in Dubai by the Vokkaligara Sangha, the golden visa award by UAE government and Inspiring Legal Falcon Award’ at Lex Falcon Global Awards in 2023. so i would suggest to consider that as well.Theon Neth (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drew Talbert

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

Fails WP:NBIO and is an example of WP:NOTNEWS. Do not see any significant coverage apart from one viral news event. (please ping on reply) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Tennessee. Shellwood (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Entertainment, Internet, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yuri Sakazaki

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

I am sorry to the author for working on this article so hard, but unfortunately, it has zero WP:SIGCOV. I tried to do WP:BEFORE, but found nothing. I believe that Den of Geek is a bit good for content, but it isn't enough. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 12:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Video games. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 12:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Somebody added two sources to the talk page but I'm not sure if they work.Tintor2 (talk) 17:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since I didn't understand the Portuguese sources that welll, I found some articles primarily focused around her in KOF and added them to reception.Tintor2 (talk) 18:43, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to User:Kazama16, I managed to provide another scholar analysis of the character.Tintor2 (talk) 22:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Emirate System in Nigeria

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

This article is brief, unsourced and lacks any significant online coverage. I have requested some development from the author but if not forthcoming shortly I would recommend deletion. Lukewarmbeer (talk) 12:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You already nominated the article for deletion with reasons explaining why it should be deleted. That’s a de facto recommendation for deletion. What did you mean by “shortly I would recommend for deletion”? Shoerack (talk) 18:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:39, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There are loads of sources that could be used to improve the article. The fact that the sources are not present in the article is not a valid reason for deletion. Shoerack (talk) 18:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The article's brevity shouldn't be a reason for deletion. While I agree that the sourcing is currently poor, if there are "loads of sources" available, as Shoerack mentioned, they should be added to the article instead of simply noting their existence. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 21:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, Shoerack has no obligation to do that. Shoerack (talk) 23:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Faith Global

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

I'm having trouble finding anything to demonstrate that this meets WP:BAND. They only seem to have released one album and an EP, neither of which charted. They only have one notable member. Most importantly of course I can find little substantial coverage in reliable sources. Granted the genericness of the name makes it difficult, but my WP:BEFORE failed to find any newspaper coverage, or online reliable sources. Some books (e.g. [51]) include passing mentions, such as a list of other acts Shears participated in. The only semi substantial coverage was a paragraph in The New Trouser Press record guide. But with only on WP:SIGCOV source I can't see how this passes WP:NBAND/WP:GNG Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 11:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 11:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is a 1983 album review in Music Week here. More needed in my opinion. ResonantDis_tortion 22:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: need more significant coverages. Anktjha (talk) 18:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of cinemas in Metro Manila

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

Wikipedia is not a business directory. Only one cinema has an article and the rest of the entries listed are almost entirely chains with cinemas attached to shopping malls. A whole lot of indiscriminate accompanying stats and features. Lack of secondary sources also means it fails WP:NLIST Ajf773 (talk) 09:33, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philippines, Lists, and Film. Ajf773 (talk) 09:33, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and as a WP:TNT delete. I'll change my vote to keep if someone change it. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 13:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Can be improved (and should). Covered as a set in Dalton, David, and Keeling, Stephen. The Rough Guide to the Philippines, Rough Guides Limited, 2011, .p. 102, for example. Well-structured, offers context. The topic meets NLIST imv. A decent SPLIT from both pages about Philippine cinema and Manila. The historical aspect of the topic (as a set; growing number of venues, for example, relatively high (and at a relatively early period) number of cinema theatres in the Philippines but with, precisely, a concentration of the country's screens in Manila, etc.) is covered in Early Cinema in Asia [Indiana University Press, 2017, passim] -Mushy Yank. 08:55, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the sources identified above by Mushy Yank that contribute to a pass of WP:NLIST in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The citation mentioned by MushyYank is a travel guide, there are multiple editions over the years but they aren't that much different to each other. One I managed to find has a brief paragraph on Cinemas in Manila. It makes passing mention of three unique cinemas, (none of which are mentioned in the article) and doesn't appear to offer anything substantial to referencing the many other cinema franchises annexed to shopping malls. Possibly the editor could attribute some of this to Cinema in the Philippines but that source offers nothing that can be used in this list article (which reads like a directory) towards WP:NLIST. This is almost an identical discussion to list of cinemas in Malaysia. Ajf773 (talk) 09:28, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, one is a travel guide, obviously, as are all Rough Guides books, and it dedicates part of a p. to cinema venues in Manila as a set (but it can be used for individual venues, if you wish). The other reference I mentioned, and that you possibly overlooked, is Early Cinema in Asia a book where the subject is covered significantly as as a set in multiple pages.Deocampo, Nick. Cine: Spanish Influences on Early Cinema in the Philippines, Anvil Publishing, Incorporated, 2017 has coverage about the early times (and cinema theaters of the time as a set) too and by the same author, Film: American Influences on Philippine Cinema also covers cinema theaters a a set in Manila (it can be considered the second part of the former). P. 1255 of Film Year Book (1938) has one paragraph on the the topic a a set (at that time). More importantly for a more modern list, I see, also signficant coverage of the topic as a set in Philippine Cinema and the Cultural Economy of Distribution - p. 110 & sq, for example. Also Abinales's Modern Philippines - page 325 can help improve the lead section.

Feel free to use those and clean up the page if you think some entries are an issue.

Not convinced the discussion you mentioned (and that you had initiated, evidently) had a fair outcome, but that's just me (see its TP, where, precisely I mentioned that issue to @Explicit). Nor that, there too, you read the reference I mentioned. And, again, the notability of some individual entries is not what should be established here. The notability of the general topic, as a set, is. Thank you. -Mushy Yank. 10:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This simply isn't an appropriate list article and is heavy with WP:OR. Nate • (chatter) 14:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTDIR, WP:NOTGUIDE, etc. A travel guide listing a few cinemas of interest isn't enough to justify an article about every cinema in Manila, any more than it would be to create a "List of restaurants in Manila" page. The other sources mentioned seem to be peripheral coverage of the topic at best. Astaire (talk) 18:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dauntless: The Battle of Midway

AfDs for this article:

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

This article about a 2019 film was previously deleted at AfD, then later re-created with more sources, but the sources still don't establish notability per WP:NFILM. All of the works in the Bibliography section are about real-life aircraft and all of them were published 18 years or more before this film came out, meaning that they could not have any content about the film. Five of the 14 footnotes are to IMDb, which is not considered a reliable source (see Wikipedia:IMDB). Three of the other footnotes -- Naval History and Heritage Command, Hall of Valor Project, and a book by Barrett Tillman -- pertain to the real-life events this film was based on, not to the film itself. UCM.ONE is the website of the film's distributor in the German-speaking world. Rotten Tomatoes is a reliable source (see Wikipedia:ROTTENTOMATOES), but it's being used to cite the fact that the film has been reviewed by no critics they keep track of. The review from "That Moment In" appears to have been taken down from the website which is not a major review site anyway. The purported review from "Flickering Myth" is not a proper review; it's tagged as "News" by Flickering Myth, not as "Reviews". That leaves only two sources I haven't dismissed yet: a page from The Numbers with estimated DVD sales and a review on a blog about naval air history. I don't think this is enough to pass WP:NFILM. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -Mushy Yank. 16:45, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first AfD had identified a review by David Duprey at That MomentIn apparently? Were you able to check it? What about a merge into the article about the battle? (2-3 sentences in a bottom section; the film is listed in the See also section, the film having a rather notable cast)? Thanks. -Mushy Yank. 17:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the review by David Duprey is still mentioned in the article. I found it archived here. However, That Moment In has taken the review down -- see this search which finds nothing -- and is not a particularly significant website anyway to my knowledge. The more prominent films Midway (1976 film) and Midway (2019 film), both of which have much more notable casts and actually received theatrical releases, aren't discussed in the Battle of Midway article, just listed in the "See also" section, so I don't believe that this film should be discussed there either. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Weak Keep, then, two acceptable reviews (Duprey and Matt Willis, who might be considered an expert in naval history) + mildly notable cast, released, verifiable. If an ATD is found, not opposed to Redirect. -Mushy Yank. 00:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think I found a review or two - honestly, this is a good example of why it's so important to represent sources accurately and not stuff an article full of puffery. That can do more to damage the chances of an article surviving than anything. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also note that misrepresenting the Flickering Myth source also puts the other sources into question, so another reason to be cautious. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the Duprey review - whomever wrote the reception section greatly misrepresented what was written. He didn't say it was bad, but the guy didn't really praise much about the movie either, as he found it generally forgettable. Looks like the other source I thought I had was just a trailer post. I'll keep digging, though. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:30, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or redirect. This really, really pushes the boundaries of what is considered to pass NFILM. The reviews are OK, but not the strongest, and the only other sources is an article about the movie releasing (and a borderline WP:TRIVIAL source at that), a database page of home video sales, and a page that looks to be a general database type listing of the film. I do have to restate my earlier bit about the puffery - while the sourcing (that's actually about the film) is very weak, it would likely have not been as heavily scrutinized if it wasn't filled with some mild puffery. On a side note, I did find this Screen Rant source that lists it as one of the top 10 mockbusters per IMDb, but it doesn't give any info on how they compiled the list so I'm a bit reluctant to include it in the article. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep as per the two reviews included in the reception section of the article, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No good reason to delete. Meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:38, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found two other reviews, but I don't know whether the sources would be considered reliable: "REVIEW: Roland Emmerich’s MIDWAY is about as bad as it sounds" on The Beat (that started as a blog, but has editorial staff ), and "Computer Degenerated: A Review of Midway (2019)" from The National World War II Museum, New Orleans. Neither of them are positive about the film. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vinod Adani

AfDs for this article:

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

The non-notable businessman does not become notable simply because his brother is notable (WP:GNG). In the last AFD, the article was deleted, but it was later recreated. You can check the old AFD as well. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vinod_Adani_ Baqi:) (talk) 11:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. Baqi:) (talk) 11:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Arab Emirates, Gujarat, and Cyprus. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mariana Serbezova

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

Still fails SPORTSCRIT. Courtesy ping Geschichte Jay Cubby 04:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Olympics. Jay Cubby 04:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What Bulgarian newspaper archives did you look in for this offline-era Olympic medalist and world silver medalist? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the best I could find was 1 line mentions in google books. Unless someone finds coverage in Bulgarian, she fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 02:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This article was PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:SPORTBASIC says "The guidelines on this page are intended to reflect the fact that sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have achieved success in a major international competition at the highest level." She did achieve success in a major international competition at the highest level - she won a bronze medal in a rowing event at the 1980 Summer Olympics. Are you suggesting that winning an Olympic bronze medal isn't "success in a major international competition at the highest level"? As for coverage, by searching on her name in Cyrillic script, I found this article from 2021 [52], which has more details about her, and in 2019, she was awarded a Bulgarian Olympic Committee "Sport for a Peaceful World" medal" [53]. With an award and half an article in 2019 and 2021, I think it's highly likely that there are more sources in Bulgarian dating from 1980 on, that have not yet been digitised. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:25, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
RebeccaGreen,

Your first quote is only the second half of SPORTSBASIC, the first sentence of which is as follows: A person is presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of significant coverage, that is, multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.

Critically, sports biographies "must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Meeting this requirement alone does not indicate notability, but it does indicate that there are likely sufficient sources to merit a stand-alone article."

Your question, Are you suggesting that winning an Olympic bronze medal isn't "success in a major international competition at the highest level"?. No, I'm not, my reason for AfDing this is because Serbezova perhaps fulfills the reason for having an article (winning bronze) but has no SIGCOV (the letter of the policy).

On the two sources:

The 2021 one isn't substantial. There's a description of the race, but the only 'biographical' information on her is as follows (translated by an LLM because Google Translate is bad): Mariyana Serbezova was born on October 15, 1959, in Plovdiv. She started rowing, like Ana Bakova, in 1972 under coach Milka Kuleva. She competed for Trakia Plovdiv, Akademik Sofia, and Levski Spartak. She was a multiple national champion and a medalist at numerous prestigious regattas. She retired from competitive rowing in 1991 and a year later began teaching physical education at a school in Sofia. She and Ana Bakova crossed paths twice at major championships. In 1979, they won silver in the quadruple sculls in Bled, Yugoslavia, and at the aforementioned 1980 Moscow Olympics, where they won bronze. In 1986, she competed at the World Championships in Nottingham and finished fourth in the quadruple sculls.

The 2019 one is merely a list of recipients of the award. Serbezova's coverage there is translated as follows: Mariyana Serbezova – Bronze medalist at the 1980 Moscow Olympics, rowing, awarded the “Sport for a Peaceful World” medal on the occasion of a milestone anniversary. Jay Cubby 18:07, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep winning the Olympic medal helps notability. This [54] is at least confirmation of the win and some context, but minimal coverage. I'd give this a weak pass, given the Olympic win. Oaktree b (talk) 14:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b, SPORTSCRIT states that sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Meeting this requirement alone does not indicate notability, but it does indicate that there are likely sufficient sources to merit a stand-alone article.. That source is by no means significant coverage. Jay Cubby 01:04, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Millennium Bank (Greece)

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

Not notable defunct bank with poor sources Cinder painter (talk) 11:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Greece. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ximena Caminos

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

Following brief discussion on the talk page, in which an editor drafted a new version of the article, it makes more sense to delete this article and for active contributors to create something in draftspace in due course. In its current form, it resembles a CV or promotional piece more than an encyclopedia article. The subject is mentioned in reliable sources but, again, too promotional to establish notability. Northernhenge (talk) 15:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Northernhenge (talk) 15:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Argentina. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There is nothing in the body of this stubbed-down version of the article that establishes general notability because there is nothing in the remaining text that refers to significant coverage. It has not been necessary to check the sources, because there is nothing that needs to be verified. There is also a draft. I have not yet reviewed the draft, but it seems better to delete this stub first and deal with the draft in the near future. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 02:49, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there have been some recent additions to this article that need to be assessed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The coverage I can find of her in independent sources rises to level of multiple examples of significant coverage imo:

Guardian article^[3] which is mostly about her Reef Line project but she is quoted throughout

NYT Q&A^[4] with her which is quite detailed

Vogue piece^[5] is about her *and* her (ex?)husband, but it could be argued sigcov.

NYT mention^[6] also about Reef Line, she + her project has a two paragraph write-up

InsomniaOpossum (talk) 00:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC) InsomniaOpossum (talk) 00:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CR (talk) 10:55, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have consolidated the references in the article (combining duplicates, replacing dead urls or non-existent archive urls with live urls). I see there are other references in an earlier version of this article [55], which may provide more coverage - and there is also a draft article about this person Draft:Ximena Caminos which also has some other sources. Very confusing - I will try to assess all the sources to determine if she meets WP:GNG, and include relevant sources if she does. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:45, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Electronics Mart India Limited

AfDs for this article:

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Andhra Pradesh. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dr vulpes (Talk) 10:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aurum Proptech Limited

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Maharashtra. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article doesn't show notability, and a WP:BEFORE search didn't find anything that would meet WP:ORGCRIT. It's all self published resources, routine announcements and trivial coverage, mainly in press releases. Bakhtar40 (talk) 10:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dr vulpes (Talk) 10:47, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Waves (OTT)

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

WP:PROMO, Recently launched OTT, Promotional motive to create this Wikipedia page. It is an advertisement more than a Wikipedia article. Or it is good to be redirected on Prasar Bharati. Moreover unable to satisfy WP:SIGCOV in multiple reliable secondary sources. Bakhtar40 (talk) 10:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, Companies, and India. Bakhtar40 (talk) 10:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as the creator of the article, this is an important article because it's about India's National streamer Doordarshan. I tried my maximum to make it. If it have issues, I am requesting to help it to make more suitable for Wikipedia Guidelines. Thank you United Blasters (talk) 00:21, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Definitely needs sources, but removing an article about a streaming service from India's state broadcaster when we have many more unsourced articles about generic commercial screaming head news channels and filler movie channels in the country feels WP:POINTy and this is more an expansion candidate for sure. There's certainly less PROMO here than your average Network 18/Zee article, which is mainly about the service's debut rather than any future promises. Nate • (chatter) 14:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mantri Developers

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Karnataka. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Graham Dalby

AfDs for this article:

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

Still no evidence he meets WP:MUSICBIO yet. In a WP:BEFORE search the only secondary coverage I could find of him was this article in the local weekly Kent Messenger. Couldn't find any RS that he'd written for, sung for or appeared in anything on the BBC, just fragments on social media, Soundcloud, etc. Editors hunting for coverage, please note there's an unrelated jockey with the same name, so you might want to exclude the word "jockey" on a search. Wikishovel (talk) 09:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Hong Kong, and England. Wikishovel (talk) 09:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no indication of notability, fails WP:MUSICBIO. Anktjha (talk) 10:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Once again, no sources and nothing online to show he meets WP:GNG. Junbeesh (talk) 11:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is quite a lot of coverage in digitised British newspapers. I'm pretty sure he will meet WP:GNG and/or WP:MUSICBIO. I'll add some sources. We really need the British Newspaper Archive in the Wikipedia Library so other editors can find the sources there too! RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leave Graham Dalby the way as it is, it will eventually meet WP:MUSICBIO. I will add sources to it. It was under construction, don't take it down. Mrtoadtv (talk) 14:55, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Likely more coverage in older newspapers, there's this [56], not a great reveiw, but it counts. Oaktree b (talk) 15:04, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's also a short staff bio on Allmusic referenced in the article, which is an WP:RSMUSIC, and an album review in The Syncopated Times now cited too. The BBC website has evidence on his contributions, including Dalby and the orchestra he founded playing a significant section on BBC Radio 2 - see [57]. ResonantDis_tortion 18:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kuldeep Sandhu

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

Does not pass WP:MUSICBIO, also see Kulldeep Sandhu and Draft:Kulldeep Sandhu. Found no in-depth coverage in any cited source. Taabii (talk) 09:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 09:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No Mention why Kuldeep Sandhu is notable.There is no reliable sources available about him maybe there are some chances of WP:COI because maximum references are used in this page are of different person that i already removed earlier. --Garvitpandey1522 (talk) 19:23, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Raman Raheja

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

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. There have been several attempts in the past to create a page for this person, with a high chance of WP:UPE involvement. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_10#Raman_Raheja_(entrepreneur) TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Congratulations RfD !voters for allowing an obvious bad-faith title circumvention to escape proper review. Now its time for it to meet its fate * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bhagwa Love Trap conspiracy theory

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

POVFORK of Love jihad conspiracy theory. There is absolutely not enough coverage to warrant a separate article and the content already existed at Love jihad conspiracy theory#"Reverse"_love_jihad. - Ratnahastin (talk) 08:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Conspiracy theories, Discrimination, Islam, Hinduism, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It is literally the reverse of the topic it is being claimed it is a POVFORK of. They are more like the opposites or antitheses of each other than anything else. And the page here is supported by its own dozen references. It's possible that both of these pages could be nested under a broader parent article at a neutral title encompassing both children, but there's no reason to nest one topic under its thematic sibling. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moneyview

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

Reviewed all sources and what I found are press releases, primary sources and passing mentions of the company. As of the time of nomination, sources number one to 8 are mostly press releases, and from number 9 to 19 are mostly primary sources. The few ones that look reliable are not enough to meet WP:GNG or WP:NBASIC. Mekomo (talk) 08:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Business, Companies, and India. Mekomo (talk) 08:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources are full of PR and sponsored articles WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Fails GNG and NCORP. GrabUp - Talk 08:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:49, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Riyan Al Jidani

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

Reviewed all sources cited but none is reliable to meet WP:GNG or other criteria. Described as a writer, there is no good review of his book(s) other than a single review by the newspaper where he is a reporter. Mekomo (talk) 07:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Journalism, Sports, and Saudi Arabia. Mekomo (talk) 07:51, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SepPure Technologies

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

This does not meet notability guidelines for WP:NORG as all sources reviewed are press releases and primary sources closely related to the organization. Only a few give minor coverage and those are insignificant to meet WP:GNG and or WP:NBASIC. Mekomo (talk) 07:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Singapore, and Canada. Mekomo (talk) 07:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment These are Press Releases [58] and [59] . Others seems company's announcements. Bakhtar40 (talk) 11:08, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Abbas Naqvi

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

Reviewed all sources cited but none is an RS because they are the subject's own writing as a journalist. The one source [60] that seem to be a significant coverage turned out to be a promotional piece. Mekomo (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and India. Mekomo (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Louis Tordini

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

Non-notable author article, which somebody claiming to be the subject has been editing Orange Mike | Talk 05:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Things That Hang from Trees, unless that page also goes up for deletion. --Richard Yin (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of entertainment events at Gelora Bung Karno Sports Complex

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

This list fails WP:NLIST as there is no evidence (here or in WP:BEFORE search) that independent, reliable sources discuss the entertainment (or any other) events taking place at this sports complex as a group. Without evidence of such coverage, this list also fails WP:NOTDATABASE by being a database of non-notable individual events and fails WP:NOR because the work of compiling this list is itself an effort of original research. I WP:BOLDly redirected the page; however, the page creator reverted my action, so I bring it to AfD to seek a community consensus to redirect this page to Gelora Bung Karno Sports Complex. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Lists, and Indonesia. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Waterside hot water hay pellet furnace

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

Interesting idea which received some news coverage and a grant of 100k, but I don't see any evidence that it was picked up by any companies/organizations/entities, or even individual people. All the coverage I can find dates back to 2010-2012. No lasting impact. P.S. sorry about 'indiscernible' category, not sure if this falls under product or technology? InsomniaOpossum (talk) 01:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be merged into Central_heating#Types_of_central_heating. TurboSuperA+ (☏) 07:54, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Panayotis D. Cangelaris

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

A vanity page and likely autobiography (user = P.D.C., who has edited primarily this page and other pages related to the Cangelaris family) of a non-notable individual; fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. No evidence of passing any criterion of WP:ACADEMIC. No evidence of passing WP:NAUTHOR; his books appear to be self-published. No evidence of passing WP:GNG; the sources are limited to passing mentions in government documents/directories and mostly a long run of mentions in various Who's Who lists, a pay-to-play source that is not independent. And no evidence of passing on any other WP:NBIO criterion. Nothing qualifying comes up in a BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 06:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Visual arts, and Greece. Dclemens1971 (talk) 06:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The awards for volunteering and stamp collecting aren't notable ones, the books and journal articles don't seem to have attracted any meaningful reviews or citations, and his political and diplomatic activities don't seem to have any secondary coverage. This seems to be a vanity page packed with every possible award and achievement in the author's life, but I can't see any that could give a claim to notability. MCE89 (talk) 09:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom, the entire "Hobbies and Volunteering" section is totally unsourced, and is likely written by the subject. fails academic, nauthor, nbio and gng.

Themoonisacheese (talk) 10:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Notability not found. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Delete: no indication of notability and unsourced section. Anktjha (talk) 10:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Only hits I get are primary items or vanity websites. Stamp collecting doesn't seem to be notable, This reads as an extended resume. Long way from notability Oaktree b (talk) 15:24, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Eminency

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

Article about a non-notable sports news photography company; fails WP:NCORP. The coverage is limited to:

A WP:PRIMARYSOURCE: [61],
Links to news articles/sites that have licensed Photo Eminency photos -- literally the most trivial of WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS: [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68].
Another trivial mention: [69],
Passing coverage of niche industry awards in WP:TRADES publications: [70], [71], [72], [73], [74].
A source that does not mention the company: [75].

Nothing else qualifying found in a WP:BEFORE search. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Photography, Companies, Martial arts, and Thailand. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ARC Aerosystems

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

This company does not appear to clear WP:NCORP. Very few sources were in this article even before a cull of promotional language (the references appear to be taking the place of notes, making this page an exercise in WP:OR), and the sources I found in my WP:BEFORE search are WP:ORGTRIV: routine news of product announcements, transaction announcements, etc. (Any company for which an infobox entry is accompanied by a ? is not likely to have the coverage in WP:SIRS necessary for NCORP.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, and United Kingdom. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom

Themoonisacheese (talk) 10:24, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DO NOT delete per nom. This request for deletion seems a petty attempt that folows too closely WP guidelines, and forgetting the spirit of Wikepedia. ARC Aero Systems (to which I have no connection) appear to be pn the brink of a major breakthrough in aviation, namely giving an autogyro/gyroplane (whose operating costs are a fraction of an equivalent helicopter) the capability of vertical take of and landing (VTOL). This can give massive savings for "air ambulances" and other emergency and military services, as well as benefitting commercial and private operators. Surely this is NOTABLE, FFS! Arrivisto (talk) 13:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Business Psychologists

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

Marked for notability concerns since 2010. 2 of the 3 sources are its own website, the other one being LinkedIn. A search found no third party coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 04:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Psychology, Ireland, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 04:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Appears to be WP:ADMASQ; fails WP:NCORP. Dclemens1971 (talk) 06:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no significant coverages, fails WP:NCORP. Anktjha (talk) 10:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Antorborti

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

This unreleased film (apparently filmed in 2022) fails WP:NFILM, which specifies that Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles. This movie's coverage is limited to tabloid-style mentions in unbylined articles that trigger the concerns of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Thus, the articles that reference to the film's production are not reliable sources. Until such time as the the production is confirmed by reliable sources or the film is released and given full-length reviews by multiple reliable sources, there is no pass of WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. (Note that the promotional bio of the filmmaker by the same page creator is also up for deletion for similar reasons.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Bangladesh. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: non notable film and sources are unhelpful. Anktjha (talk) 06:54, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify.: And wait for release. Not sure all the coverage is really "not reliable", btw. For example, please note that established tabloids can be used per WP:TABLOID. What makes you say, for example, that, Bangladesh Pratidin cannot be used for verification of uncontroversial facts? even not bylined articles. Also, please note that, even if certain users insist that that section of an informational page can apply to all the subctontinent, using WP:NEWSORGINDIA for other countries than India is something that may be frowned upon by certain users. The lead actor having died last year and this apparently wrapped film being one of his last, I suppose a Redirect and [minimal/simple mention] merge to Ahmed Rubel could also be considered. (with the following source, https://www.alokitobangladesh.com/print-edition/entertainment/171837/আসছে-আহমেদ-রুবেল-অভিনীত-সিনেমা-অন্তর্বর্তী or https://follow-upnews.com/জীবনযাপন/এসএম-কাইয়ুম-এর-পরিচালনা/ -Mushy Yank. 10:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC) [For the record, full quote of applicable guideline, above in green is: "Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines." (emphasis mine).-Mushy Yank. 10:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)][reply]
MY, I fundamentally disagree that the Akolito Bangladesh story (authored by "Entertainment Reporter") and the Follow-UpNews story (with no byline at all) constitute the kind of WP:SIGCOV necessary to make the production itself notable. They cannot be considered reliable. WP:NEWSORGINDIA applies to all South Asian entertainment coverage, in which unbylined coverage has a reasonably high likelihood of being paid/sponsored placement and thus cannot be relied upon per the WP:RSP guideline of Exercise caution in using such sources for factual claims or to establish notability. Look at the tone and language of the article, its placement in the publication, use of generic bylines not identifying an individual reporter or reviewer, overlap in language with articles found in other publications and on other websites, and others. And for a film to remain unreleased nearly three years after shooting suggests this film may never see the light of day, making a "draftify" outcome less useful. (And given the potential COI and promotional nature of the page creator's edits, I suspect this would result in a quick return to mainspace and we'd be right back here again.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:08, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971"the Akolito Bangladesh story (authored by "Entertainment Reporter") and the Follow-UpNews story (with no byline at all) constitute the kind of WP:SIGCOVnecessary to make the production itself notable.": but that's not at all what I said! I said to use them to verify and source the role in case it is redirected and merged.

As for NEWSORGINDIA, again, I understood why you wish to use it, but doing so has been said to hurt the feelings of certain non-Indian users (and probably of some Indian users too, or even third-party users). To extend it to all South Asian entertainment might also be seen as expressing a Wikipedia:Systemic bias.

Thank you anyway. -Mushy Yank. 20:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

S M Kayum

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

Highly promotional bio for a Bangladeshi filmmaker whose first film, Antorborti (also nominated for deletion), has not yet been released. At best it's WP:TOOSOON, but either way this filmmaker fails WP:NFILM and WP:NCREATIVE, since none of his other works are significant. The sources are almost entirely unbylined tabloid news from Bangladeshi outlets that have the same WP:NEWSORGINDIA problems with undisclosed paid placement. On top of this, almost none of these sources provide WP:SIGCOV of Kayum. In my search and review I found no qualifying sources for WP:N. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Poetry, and Bangladesh. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: See AfD about film. -Mushy Yank. 09:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WNGN-LD

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

Non-notable LPTV which may well be silent. Only sources are RabbitEars and the FCC. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Christianity, and New York. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of television stations in New York (state)#LPTV stations: as the creator of this article all the way back in 2006, I can assure you this is little more than a remnant article of the far lower, non-GNG-based inclusion standards of the era. Maybe there's something out there that could instead merit a mention somehow at WNGN (FM) (the co-owned radio station), but a history of mostly national services (or more recently, airing nothing but a random .4 carriage of the radio side) does not exactly suggest significant coverage. (What's left of Google's newspaper archive does have two articles in The Daily Gazette mentioning this station, which is more than some other LPTVs, but I don't think they're enough — even if the first article mentions the then-existence of local programming without elaboration.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

En midsommarnattsdröm (song)

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

Subject fails GNG and NSONG for not having significant coverage of independent, reliable source to pass the guidelines requirements. Cassiopeia talk 01:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Cassiopeia talk 01:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: If it reached the top of the Swedish "Singles Top 100" music chart, it's probably notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC) See https://web.archive.org/web/20120314114527/https://swedishcharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=H%25E5kan+Hellstr%25F6m&titel=En+midsommarnattsdr%25F6m&cat=s[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems like it charted at #1 for about ~1 week in Sweden, and remained in top #100 for a little while after that.^[1] I did find a short write-up of this song in particular in the Göteborgs-Posten^[2], and it's also given a passing mention in a few tabloid articles about the musician in general.^[3]^[4] Does not seem to qualify for multiple, independent sources of sigcov. InsomniaOpossum (talk) 03:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "En Midsommarnattsdröm by Håkan Hellström - Music Charts". acharts.co. Retrieved 2025-01-22.
^ Lindqvist, Johan (2005-01-14). "Håkan Hellström | En midsommarnattsdröm". Göteborgs-Posten (in Swedish). Retrieved 2025-01-22.
^ Engman, Pascal (2016-06-03). "Håkan Hellströms fejd som ännu inte har läkt". www.expressen.se (in Swedish). Retrieved 2025-01-22.
^ "Nu anklagas Håkan Hellström för låtstöld - igen". www.aftonbladet.se (in Swedish). 2005-01-29. Retrieved 2025-01-22.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per sources above. Anktjha (talk) 06:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rise Motorsports

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

The article currently only has 3 sources - 2 are social media and the last is an entry list. After a search I could not find a 3rd party source. Definitely nothing to pass any sort of WP:SIGCOV. Grahaml35 (talk) 03:02, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. Grahaml35 (talk) 03:02, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This title was originally created as a redirect. Thoughts on that?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:05, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Van Nuys, Indiana

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

As far as I can tell Van Nuys as a place, if it existed at all, was perhaps the rail station for the Indiana Village for Epileptics; the label sits next to a pair of buildings by the rail line that runs through the "campus" (actually three widely-spaced "colonies"). The facility closed for its original purpose in 1952 when Van Nuys died, and in 1956 at least part of it became the New Castle State Hospital. Today, the main "colony" has bee replaced with a penitentiary complex. Anywqay, this was plainly never a settlement. Mangoe (talk) 03:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Almost certainly just a rail point; flag stops were often named for the owner of the surrounding land, Dr. Van Nuys in this case. Not notable. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are several in-depth and detailed sources for the Indiana Village for Epileptics, including a chapter in a JHP book published in 1916. But the important ones for this discussion are the 1920s reports from the Indiana Board of State Charities which state that the Village "Can be reached by Union Traction cars", which is of course is the railway. Yes, this is the railway serving a notable subject, and the whole point of the notable subject was that it was away from the rest of the population. So no, there was no "Van Nuys unincorporated community". This article is a falsehood that it is pretty much pointless to rename and refactor. Delete. Uncle G (talk) 19:03, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luis J. Landin

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

Fails WP:GNG as he lacks SIGCOV. The Silver Star does not meet WP:ANYBIO # 1 and there is no WP:RS confirming that he was even awarded it. No lasting notability. Page created by an SPA. Mztourist (talk) 03:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 03:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: lacks significant coverages. Anktjha (talk) 07:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In addition to failing WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO, the claim that Landin is "known as Laredo's most decorated war hero" is simply untrue given at least one Medal of Honor recipient, David B. Barkley, is from Laredo. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:21, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JeriQ

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Jeriq

Articles for deletion/JeriQ

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

Fails all ramifications of WP:COMPOSER or WP:NMUSICIAN. The nominations are not exclusive and so do not inherently confer both guidelines I just mentioned.

Citation 1 from marginally reliable Vanguard with no substantial coverage.

Citation 2 from the same marginally reliable source is utterly unreliable as it lacks a byline and does not provide any useful information.

Citation 3 lacks a byline and is only 104 words, no substantial coverage.

Citation 4 does not only lack a byline, it is definitely a sponsored piece.

Citations 5, 6, and 14 are the usual nomination lists.

Citations 7 and 8 has nothing to offer to this subject's passing of WP:GNG.

Citations 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 provide no substantial coverage about this subject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:01, 20 January 2025 (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) 16:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not agree that this article fails all ramifications of WP:NMUSICIAN, as subject has:
1. "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart". | "the highest new entry this week on Top Albums at #4. BILLION DOLLAR DREAM by Jeriq is the biggest winner, moving up by 57 slots to #21."[76][77]
The Subject's notoriety can be supported by [78], from a notable magazine with a byline, and is named in some Wikipedia articles including Igbo music where he is referenced as one of the "Notable Igbo musicians."
2. "Has won or been nominated for a major music award". The Headies being a major music award in Nigeria and Africa has nominated the subject twice, as the links to the nominations has tried to prove. These nominations are seen in The Headies 2023 and the award's website [79] Chukwukadibia1 (talk) 19:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep
Chukwukadibia1 (talk) 21:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I find I cannot agree with this nomination; subject appears to meet WP:MUSICBIO. Further to the verified notable award nominations (it is not clear from the nom why they do not count), and the several above citations (which include a secondary analysis in a reliable source the subject "has been making waves in the Nigerian music scene with his hit singles and collaborations" [80]), there is further coverage including Billboard charting, Billboard critical coverage, concert review in an WP:RSNG source, and the subject had a cover feature on the WP:RSNG TurnTableCharts magazine with a sigcov bylined intro. ResonantDis_tortion 17:14, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- some of the above sourcing has been added to the article now, including the charting citation, and also a critics end of year "best of" list for Rolling Stone magazine. Some copyediting and tidying up done too. ResonantDis_tortion 20:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This was nominated in November 2024: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeriq. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer. During this AfD the article has been moved from JeriQ to Jeriq. ResonantDis_tortion 19:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging the participants of the November 2024 discussion to see if anything has changed... @Versace1608, @Bearian, @Ibjaja055. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:22, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You did a good job, ResonantDistortion, but sorry, it doesn't add a pinch of salt of WP:GNG for the subject. Firstly, for the charting, NMUSICIAN says that "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart" (emphasis mine). Not only is the Billboard chart entry being not a single, ("Oganigwe" by Zlatan featuring Odumodublvck and Jeriq), Billboard is not Nigerian's national music chart. Plus, if the song charted No. 47 on the Billboard U.S. Afrobeats Songs, it didn't really chart to confer notability on who was featured, nope, it didn't. This Afrobeats Fresh Picks also has the same issue, provides nothing to establish the mentioned notability on Jeriq.

I also cannot comprehend why you do not find the way this article was created deceptively concerning, This, then how it was moved to the supposedly correct title.

Again, "Nyem Ego" is another feature. Below is my analysis of the sources you added so far. This, coupled with my above analysis makes it evident that Jeriq is not yet a notable musician.

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://guardian.ng/saturday-magazine/weekend-beats/jeriqhood-concert-rapper-sells-out-nnamdi-azikwe-stadium-enugu/	~ The ridiculously promotional nature of this piece is a clear sign	~ Ditto	Provide literally no substantial coverage about the subject.	✘ No
https://punchng.com/jeriq-highlights-rags-to-riches-story-at-concert-jeriq/	Reflecting on the concert’s significance, JeriQ told Saturday Beats,..., clearly not.	~ Ditto	Provide literally no substantial coverage about the subject.	✘ No
https://www.turntablecharts.com/magazine/Industry_Digest_July_August_2023/82	An interview...	...while not entirely prohibited, cannot be the base on a subject's notability.	Ditto	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

--Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:20, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That it's not a Nigerian chart is not relevant, and neither is the fact it's a collaboration. Jeriq, evidently a major contributor to the piece of music, still has featured in the top 50 of a reliable chart aggregator, contributing to WP:MUSICBIO#2. He has been nominated, as a solo artist, twice for a notable national award which is WP:VERIFIED, and contributes to WP:MUSICBIO#8. At least two collaborative works with different artists have achieved non-trivial critical "best of" selections in independent sources, contributing to WP:MUSICBIO#1. The article in TurnTableCharts magazine (a website listed as a WP-reliable Nigerian source) is not only a curated interview but includes notability-supporting journalistic bylined non-trivial biographical information contributing to WP:MUSICBIO#1 (per WP:INTERVIEW). The nature of the page creation is irrelevant to the notability of the subject; for the record I have updated the article to try and improve it. Overall, the evidence points to the subject meeting the relevant notability guideline, and therefore I maintain my position to keep. ResonantDis_tortion 16:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The subject's debut album, Billion Dollar Dream, was critically reviewed by Afrocritik and The Native. He has received two nominations at The Headies. As previously pointed out, he charted on a Billboard chart as a guest act. These three reasons should be good enough for a weak keep. When I previously nominated the article, I didn't see reviews of his debut album in reliable sources. I also didn't see his nominations at The Headies. Perhaps I could have done a more in-depth search but preliminary search results didn't show reliable coverage at the time. The article contains a few promotional wording and definitely needs to be cleaned up. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 17:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you to Versace1608 for identifying further sigcov sourcing - album reviews [81] and [82]. I have added these citations to the article. ResonantDis_tortion 09:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Lawn, Indiana

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

Anyone who has looked at topos enough will take a gander at this place as it appears on the older maps, and immediately recognize it as likely a resort. And indeed, as far as I can tell, it represents an early stage of the Mount Lawn Speedway, when it had a dance hall and other such facilities alongside the track. As recounted here, the hall burned down more than once and everything except the track itself disappeared, so the area where there were other buildings is now a wooded triangle, but the track is still going strong. It's likely there's an Arcadia book on this place, but that will have to be someone else's search. I'm inclined to delete rather than redirect to eliminate any hint that this was a town. Mangoe (talk) 02:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the track appears on every topo but is never labelled as such, for whatever reason. Mangoe (talk) 03:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tha Arcadia book is ISBN 9781467110716 for New Castle. It doesn't actually have the speedway. What sources I can find are all the speedway. This just seems to be useless bad duplication as a result of mass GNIS import, combined with the usual buildings-on-map-equals-"ppl" error in the GNIS itself back in the 1980s. So I concur. Uncle G (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yaron Gottlieb

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

Fails to meet WP:N. I have been unable to find any significant coverage in reliable sources. The article's sources are mostly the subject's own works along with an article that quotes the subject a single time. Should be deleted per WP:GNG. --Helleniac (talk) 22:46, 13 January 2025 (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/2025 January 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:54, 13 January 2025 (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/2025 January 14. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:34, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have fixed some malformed formatting in this nomination that hid a good chunk of it when transcluded. No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:47, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, Israel, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:48, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just noting that the nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet, and some of their other contributions make me a little concerned that this nomination might not have been done in good faith. No opinion at this point on the merits of the AfD. MCE89 (talk) 10:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Brief article on a professional at work. Fails the GNG. gidonb (talk) 04:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - while it's true that he's not notable as an adjunct professor, he's the executive director of legal affairs for Interpol, and he's gotten some coverage for that. Bearian (talk) 05:16, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: no indication of notability. Anktjha (talk) 07:04, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ixopo High School

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

Unsourced since 2014. I was able to find one source which dedicates a sentence to the school in passing, and several which mention it as part of Alan Paton's biography, but nothing which adds up anything close to notability. Rusalkii (talk) 02:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and South Africa. Rusalkii (talk) 02:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2015 in Scandinavian music

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

We have individual pages for 2015 in Danish music and the other 4 Scandinavian countries, there is no reason to have another page grouping these 5 as well, "Scandinavian music" is not some monolithic block or typical genre.

The same applies to these other years as well:

Fram (talk) 16:07, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Lists, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. Fram (talk) 16:07, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree that the concept of "Scandinavian music" is a nonstarter. Though there are only 3 countries in Scandinavia and not 5, there is not that much overlap between the music scenes as to constitute a common sphere. The information about individual concerts and even festivals is not encyclopedically relevant and should be burnt with fire. Relevant albums should be mentioned in country-specific pages where applicable (i.e. 2015 in Swedish music – the albums might already be mentioned there, though). Since there is no one target to redirect to, delete all. Geschichte (talk) 19:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all The creation of such articles should be purely country-based. Orientls (talk) 03:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, obviously. The suggestion that we have articles on music for these individual countries is erroneous. Where are 2024 in Danish music, 2024 in Norwegian music, 2024 in Finnish music, 2024 in Swedish music? Scandinavia is as clear-cut a region as is Ireland. Why remove useful information with nothing to replace it? I'm baffled as to the reason for this nomination. Deb (talk) 09:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- 2024 in Scandinavian music is not up for deletion. For the nominated years, we do have individual articles for Norway, Denmark, ... Fram (talk) 09:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  So why would you delete a range of articles in the middle of a range of articles that are being kept up to date, in order to replace it with a range of incomplete articles whose creator was blocked years ago and hasn't returned? Deb (talk) 10:24, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - The other Scandinavia ones should later be deleted after the necessary country articles have been made, and no new Scandinavia ones should be created. Funny, by the way, that the original creator was blocked for copyvio, while you created e.g. the 2015 in Scandinavia page by an unattributed copy of all his work at the 2015 in Norway page. Fram (talk) 10:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Cut it out, right now. You haven't achieved consensus as yet. Deb (talk) 15:29, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    "should later be deleted" =/= now. Fram (talk) 15:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - These are lists that appear to fail the WP:NLIST criteria as a notable grouping discussed by reliable sources. Scandinavian Music is not a defined genre of music. Even the term Scandinavia is ill-defined - it may or may not include various territories depending upon the context. It seems these lists would be better if they followed the individual territories and can align with the current Wikipedia articles separated into territories such as Music of Iceland, Music of Finland, Music of Sweden, etc. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:44, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fram, this AFD is not formatted as a bundled nomination and so our closing editing tool, XFDcloser, will not recognize the closure decision as relevant to any articles but the one in the page title. Please look over the instructions at WP:AFD for formatting multiple article nominations so that this process is smooth for the admin who closes this discussion. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:53, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done, I hope. Fram (talk) 08:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Deb. As far as I can tell from what I found in Google Books, "Scandinavian music" is a thing. You'll find books on "Scandinavian music" generally, and comments such as "Scandinavian music as a whole" [83] and "Scandinavian music . . . is distinctive" and is "a school": [84]. You will find, even in English, Billboard spotlight "review of the year" articles on Scandanavian music in 1971, 1972, 1973, 1979, 1981 and probably every other year, though I can't search the entire run. And Scandanavia has had music periodicals since at least the 18th century: [85]. And I think that indicates that most years in Scandanavian music are likely notable. James500 (talk) 22:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- But what's the point of just repeating the information on the standard by country pages into a grouped page? We are just increasing the maintenance cost for no good reason, it's not as if the entries in the Scandinavia pages are about some cross-Scandinavian things. The 2015 page Is an 80% copy of the Norway page, with some other stuff copied from the other country pages. It adds no value at all. Fram (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  As you are fully aware from the previous conversation, most of the years don't have articles for individual countries within Scandinavia. The time for this discussion is when you've created the relevant articles. Deb (talk) 16:03, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @James500:, I appreciate you finding those sources. Unfortunately, reading through them only seems to confirm that "Scandinavian Music" is an ambiguous lumping and the music articles are still written on a national basis instead. For example. the 1924 Herbert Westerby book that you cite has a brief page attempting to describe a few similar elements among Danish, Swedish, Finnish and Norwegian music -- and then spends the next 35 pages describing the pianoforte music broken down by each individual country. (Westerly does the same with his chapters combining Spain & Portugal and Austria & Germany.) I also read the 1973 Billboard Magazine and see it lumps the countries into a general section -- but all the articles and data are written about individual nations with Billboard using individual editors from each country. Unless Scandinavian Music can be defined as a unambiguous genre, it still seems to me that listing by individual country makes more sense. And removes the duplication that occurs in 2015 in European music. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - If sources say in express words that "Scandanavian music" is a thing, we may getting into the realms of original research if we try to dispute that. Our article on Nordic folk music says it is Scandanavian, and a search for "Scandanavian folk music" in GNews indicates that it still exists, see for example, this Scandinavian folk music festival in 2017: [86]. The 1981 Billboard article, for example, does contain comments about Scandanavia as a whole, such as those in the article "Copryrights gain value". That information could not be placed in the national articles. Music does not necessarily confine itself to national boundaries. The present Sovereign states did not always exist, their boundaries have repeatedly changed, and they use each others languages (eg Swedish is an official language of Finland, and is spoken in Denmark, and Finnish is spoken in Sweden). One can find, for example, articles on Swedish music in Finland, and Finnish musicians in Sweden: [87] (and that article says that a purely national perspective of music is not sufficient to address certain topics). I could argue that our national articles are "ambiguous lumpings". If, for the sake of argument, the quantity of cross-Scandanavian material were felt to be too small to support a separate article, then this page could be redirected without prejudice to 2015 in European music#Scandanavia, and the cross-Scandanavian material added there. That would not require either deletion or an AfD. I was not aware that we had articles on European music. Alternatively, one could merge into decades in Scandanavian music. James500 (talk) 00:52, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - I agree with you about music crossing national boundaries. That's my point. Your link to Nordic folk music is a good example because it also includes all the Baltic nations and Russia in a discussion of "Scandinavian folk music." Should Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Russia be included in the 2015 in Scandinavian music list because Finland is? Is Greenland included or excluded because it has a separate music tradition? We agree that music can be a mosh pit across national borders throughout the world. That is exactly what I mean by an "ill-defined lumping." The above lists in this AFD seem to require some WP:OR to determine what is or isn't included. It is better for these music lists -- which are only about dates & events -- to be grouped by well-defined national boundaries as individual nation lists (e.g. 2015 in Norwegian music, 2015 in Swedish music, etc.). That better meets the selection guideline in WP:SELCRIT and the grouping guideline in WP:NLIST. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 16:29, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      - Scandinavian folk music is inherently Scandinavian, and should be included in this article, regardless of where it is produced. If Scandinavian folk music was produced in Adélie Land, it would potentially belong in this article. If some of the music in the Baltic nations and Russia is Scandanavian folk music, that does not imply that the rest of their music is Scandanavian. When ABBA perform in Britain, they are performing Swedish music, and that does not imply that Rod Stewart's music is also Swedish. If a reliable source says in express words that music is Scandanavian, there is no original research involved in its inclusion in the article. The national boundaries are not well defined in relation to music. The national boundaries give no help in classifying something like Finnish-Swedish music. James500 (talk) 06:39, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        The entries are not about Scandinavian folk music. And that would seem like such a small niche that a "year in x" page is not warranted. Geschichte (talk) 13:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. "Scandinavian music" is not a notable concept. Astaire (talk) 18:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OnFaith

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

Website that does not claim or show any independent notability or coverage. Website currently does not load. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 01:47, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 01:48, 28 January 2025 (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/2025 January 28. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Websites, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The WaPo, CNA and Austin American-Statesman coverage would all generally qualify as WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS, and NCORP does not have a WP:SUSTAINED requirement (unlike WP:NEVENTS or WP:NPRODUCT). However, all of these sources were published in a blitz of coverage around OnFaith's launch and I don't see any continuing coverage. As a flash in the pan company without any apparent lasting coverage beyond its launch, I'd lean delete, but I think a letter-of-the-law application of NCORP would allow a keep !vote. Dclemens1971 (talk) 07:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. This seems like a start up that got a little bit of funding but never really got going, and I suspect part of the reason it got a blitz of media coverage is that the idea of tech products centred around religion is still just a bit of a novelty to most people. I think Dclemens1971 is probably right that the coverage might strictly speaking be enough to pass WP:NCORP, but so much of it is focused on the idea rather than on the company that I'm not sure it really passes the spirit of NCORP. For instance, I can't find a single source covering the fact that the company rebranded or the fact that it shut down, or any sources about its actual operations or userbase. MCE89 (talk) 10:43, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Viale Rigo

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

Non-notable author article, Fails WP:NBIO AgusTates (talk) 01:50, 28 January 2025 (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/2025 January 28. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, and Venezuela. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Phạm Thu Hằng (diplomat)

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

She is technically a diplomat but not an ambassador (which doesn't get inherent notability in any case). She gets coverage as a spokesperson for the government, not coverage where she is the the subject. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 23:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, and Vietnam. LibStar (talk) 23:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Valley2city ^‽ 01:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: no indication of notability. Anktjha (talk) 07:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorure Ahle Iman

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

Article breaks WP:BK; the subject is non-notable and is not referenced in any WP:RSs besides those linked directly with the book's author. --Eelipe (talk) 01:06, 28 January 2025 (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/2025 January 28. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 01:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no reliable sources added. Anktjha (talk) 07:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.worldfootball.net/attendance/aut-2-liga-2024-2025/1/

[2] ttps://www.footballwebpages.co.uk/national-league-north/attendances

[3] ttps://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2024/dec/02/ground-zero-for-climate-change-the-shoreline-sculpture-park-coming-to-miami

[4] ttps://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/04/travel/reef-line-miami-beach.html

[5] ttps://www.vogue.com/article/faena-forum-cultural-center-miami-ximena-caminos-curator-baz-luhrmann

[6] ttps://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/03/arts/design/art-basel-miami-beach-see.html

[7] "En Midsommarnattsdröm by Håkan Hellström - Music Charts". acharts.co. Retrieved 2025-01-22.

[8] Lindqvist, Johan (2005-01-14). "Håkan Hellström | En midsommarnattsdröm". Göteborgs-Posten (in Swedish). Retrieved 2025-01-22.

[9] Engman, Pascal (2016-06-03). "Håkan Hellströms fejd som ännu inte har läkt". www.expressen.se (in Swedish). Retrieved 2025-01-22.

[10] "Nu anklagas Håkan Hellström för låtstöld - igen". www.aftonbladet.se (in Swedish). 2005-01-29. Retrieved 2025-01-22.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]