Wikipedia:XfD today

Speedy deletion candidates

Articles

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< June 04	June 06 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

List of Rival Schools characters

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

I've been doing a pretty hard deep dive on the Street Fighter franchise as of late, and in all honesty I haven't come across anything indicating there's discussion to warrant notability for this list.

Akira and to a lesser extent Hinata are the two main characters that received any reaction after release, with the exception of Tiffany getting a small share of the 2000's "HOTTEST BABES" commentary that says nothing but still manages to make you cringe physically. It's in that same Capcom boat like Star Gladiator or Power Stone where the character exist, but there's no commentary about them. Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand at the 1995 Rugby League World Cup

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

An article repeating information on the respective World Cup article only told from a New Zealand point of view is not needed. All information here is on the respective World Cup article. No other team has this. Mn1548 (talk) 18:58, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because the same reasons:

David Gabriel

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

Has only one source, which is not independent. A before search found [1] and [2], the second of which is the only source I could find which could be considered secondary. Even that, however, is not WP:SIGCOV, as it's about the show rather than the character. Subject fails WP:GNG and is not notable. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Crime. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interpersonal communication relationship dissolution

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

This 2007 research paper masquerading as an encyclopedia article (with assorted other issues rising to TNT-level) predates most other student contributions but bears similar issues. The merge process has (as usual) failed to handle the situation, so here we are. Sdkb ^talk 18:32, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to breakup as ATD. I'd also be fine with deletion if we deem the title ineligible and handle the less-than-half-dozen incoming links, or with a merge if anyone finds anything salvageable. Sdkb ^talk 18:32, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Sdkb ^talk 18:32, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Treason Act 1547

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

Only sources cited by the article are the statute itself and Parliament, neither of which is independent. Only reliable sources I can find provide a brief mention, not the substantial coverage required by WP:NOTABLE. Legend of 14 (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and United Kingdom. Legend of 14 (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Kershaw

AfDs for this article:

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

WP:BLP of a karateka, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing notability criteria for sportspeople. As always, sports figures are not automatically notable just for existing, and have to show evidence of passing WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about them and their accomplishments -- but this is referenced entirely to primary source content self-published by organizations he was directly affiliated with, showing no GNG-worthy reliable sourcing whatsoever, and claims absolutely nothing about him that would be "inherently" notable without proper GNG-worthy sourcing.
There's also not a single inbound link to this article from any other Wikipedia article but List of karateka -- and while that isn't a deletion rationale in and of itself, it does kind of imply something about notability if there aren't any other articles with his name in them at all. Even after doing a text search on "Dave Kershaw", every single other instance of that name in Wikipedia is referring to a yachter, a scientist or a Canadian record producer, not a karateka.
Note also prior discussion (which did pertain to this same Dave Kershaw) which landed as a delete — this was recreated four years later by a different WP:SPA with no history of editing on any other topic, the same situation as the prior deleted version, per that discussion, thus continuing to suggest a potential WP:COI. Bearcat (talk) 17:50, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United Kingdom. Bearcat (talk) 17:50, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:11, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criminal Law Act 1827

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

This topic does not have sources that meet the WP:NOTABILITY guideline. I went searching for additional sources, but couldn't find anything. I will go through the references in the article as of this comment, and explain why each of the sources inadequate.

Only cites other acts, which are not independent sources for this topic.
"Pratt, John Tidd (1827). A Collection of the Late Statutes Passed for the Administration of Criminal Justice in England. 52 Fleet St, London: W Benning. p. 69." Just seems to be the text of the statute, not independent or secondary.
Bouvier, John (1856). "Bouvier's Law Dictionary". Constitution Society. Retrieved 11 June 2016. The phrase "Criminal Law Act" appears 0 times on the webpage.
Baker, J. H. (2007). An Introduction to English Legal History (4th ed.). Oxford: OUP. ISBN 978-0-406-93053-8. Is only offered to provide background information about other laws.
Oldham, James (1 June 2006). Trial by Jury. New York: NYU Press. p. 278. ISBN 0814762042. This is just a page of footnotes in a book about the American justice, in which the phrase "Criminal Law Act" does not appear.
Burtsell, Richard (1907). "Benefit of Clergy". The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved 11 June 2016 – via New Advent. The phrase "Criminal Law Act" does not appear. This source also may be Tertiary
Deedes, John; Merivale, Herman (1851). Law Society Reports. Vol. X. London: E B Ince. p. 27. The Law Society may not be independent, but this source is only being cited for information about the Felony Act 1841.

None of these sources provide secondary, independent, substantial coverage required by the aforementioned guideline. Legend of 14 (talk) 17:24, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and United Kingdom. Legend of 14 (talk) 17:24, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies GNG very clearly, with significant coverage in Google Books, Google Scholar, the Internet Archive, HeinOnline and elsewhere. The sources presently in the article are not the only ones. For random examples, I could point to the commentary on the Act in Halsbury's Statutes [3] and Archbold's Peel's Acts [4] and periodical articles [5]. I actually cited Chitty's Statutes on the talk page. There are many, many, many other sources. The short title was given to the Act in the 1890s, and is not always used. The Act is also cited by session and chapter, by its long title ("Act for further improving the Administration of Justice") and so on. They may be popular titles. James500 (talk) 17:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nioh 3

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

Disputed draftification, WP:DRAFTOBJECT applies. Fails WP:GNG Is WP:TOOSOON. Pointless to return to draft, easily recreated whenever it becomes notable, and that will be significantly different froths version 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 16:54, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Visual arts, Comics and animation, and Games. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 16:54, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Nioh#Sequel or Nioh 2 and expand accordingly. Far too soon for its own article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:24, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto Parra Vallette

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

Subject fails notability guidelines for politicians, and sources from here and a cursory search are insufficient to establish general notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Chile. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Does not fail NPOL, as the mayor of a large city in Chile (Viña del Mar). He did so in full capacity following the removal of office of Rodrigo González, who preceded him. Although he was the mayor for only three months, the article could well be expanded using offline sources such as El Mercurio de Valparaíso. --Bedivere (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but 334,248 is not large enough to entitle the mayors to be inherently notable. Let's be consistent with our judgments. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Luis Trejo

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

Subject fails notability guidelines for politicians, and sources from here and a cursory search are insufficient to establish general notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:43, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Chile. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:43, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, obviously without prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody with access to archived Chilean media can write and source something more substantive than this. Mayors are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just for existing, and have to show significant press coverage enabling us to write a substantive article about their political impact — specific things they did, specific projects they spearheaded, specific effects their mayoralty had on the development of the city, and on and so forth. But this basically just states that he existed, and just cites the absolute bare minimum of sourcing needed to prevent it from being speedied as completely unsourced, without adding any of the more substantive content or sourcing that we would actually need to see. Bearcat (talk) 16:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kris Knochelmann

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

Subject fails notability guidelines for politicians, and sources from here and a cursory search are insufficient to establish general notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:39, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, United States of America, and Kentucky. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:39, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Helge Mathisen

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

Mostly based on a personal website and a database, lacks reliable indepth sources to establish notability. Fram (talk) 16:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Norway. Fram (talk) 16:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun Kalnasy

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

Contested WP:PROD. Only played 30 matches for NPSL without any WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 16:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Sportspeople, Washington, and Georgia (U.S. state). Svartner (talk) 16:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Terp (music industry jargon)

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

WP:NOTDICTIONARY. This article is just a definition, etymology, and usage examples of a jargon term; that's a dictionary entry. I don't see evidence that this article can be expanded significantly beyond a dictionary entry for this term. —Bkell (talk) 15:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Virtually devoid of content anyways. Could be mentioned at "dance" (essentially its definition) but I'm not sure a redirect is even worth it - that sort of disambiguation isn't likely to be searched for. 16:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Lorne Maclaine, Baron of Moy

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

Minor nobility? figure, has not "received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." to pass WP:BIO WP:GNG Suggest redirect to Clan Maclaine of Lochbuie Nayyn (talk) 15:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility, and United Kingdom. Nayyn (talk) 15:48, 5 June 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 speedy keep (nom withdrawn)‎. (non-admin closure) Jumpytoo Talk 17:09, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Lixinsha Bridge collapse

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

Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 15:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator as it looks like the article has previously survived AFD before. XYZ1233212 (talk) 15:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and China. XYZ1233212 (talk) 15:48, 5 June 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.

Czech Republic in First Place!

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

Fails relevant guidelines including WP:ORG. Most of the article isn't even about the political party. The sources which do relate to the party, do not provide in-depth and independent coverage of it. C 679 15:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Czech Republic. C 679 15:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chen Zhehan

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

No sources to support notability Stvbastian (talk) 15:42, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Badminton, and China. Stvbastian (talk) 15:42, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chen Cheng-kuan

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

No sources to support notability Stvbastian (talk) 15:42, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Badminton, and Taiwan. Stvbastian (talk) 15:42, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chen Yongrui

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

No sources to support notability Stvbastian (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Badminton, and China. Stvbastian (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criminal Statutes Repeal Act 1827

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

Cannot find more than passing mention in independent, secondary sources. WP:NOTABILITY Legend of 14 (talk) 15:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and United Kingdom. Legend of 14 (talk) 15:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Article already has four secondary sources in the references, and is a notable statute. Tagging for ref improvement would be a more appropriate action. Mauls (talk) 16:28, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bled White (film)

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

Non-notable film, showed in non-notable festivals and did not appear to receive any professional reviews, per WP:NF BOVINEBOY2008 15:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Marksmen Quartet

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

Article about a band, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. As always, bands are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they existed, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about them and their music -- but this is completely unreferenced, the only attempts at "referencing" that have ever previously been in the article at all are primary sources (like their own website, YouTube and Spotify) which aren't support for notability, and the article claims absolutely nothing about them that would be "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to pass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously Funny

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

Non-notable comedy film whose sources are IMDb, YouTube and Amazon. CPDJay (talk) 14:42, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Entertainment, and United States of America. CPDJay (talk) 14:42, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it's chat-gpt created if to look at the url endings of the so called sources. --Cinder painter (talk) 14:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Pompliano

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

This new promotional draft consists entirely of routine business news and personal interviews. The NY Post and TechCrunch links are obviously interviews, both saying in their voices what the subject wants them to say about him. The Forbes.sites source is a blog, the Bloomberg source is entirely about routine funding, and the WSJ article is about a complaint the subject made about a former employer eight years ago. None of these seem to meet what I would normally consider direct detailing of a biographical subject from reliable independent sources. The page creator has lately arrived on Wikipedia and each of their page creations seem to be badly sourced drafts about crypto subjects. I am sometimes wrong, but this set of edits looks much like undeclared paid editing to this reviewer. I was inclined to tag as A7, but IMHO the big name sources WSJ and Bloomberg deserve a fuller discussion (though neither detail). I can't determine from found or applied sources how this particular subject is more noteworthy than any of the tens of thousands of other aspiring crypto-entrepreneurs out there. BusterD (talk) 20:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Cryptocurrency. BusterD (talk) 20:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: The Wall Street Journal is more about the firing than about the person, it doesn't seem promotional. Blomberg is about an IPO, but the source is solid. Forbes seems ok, along with the rest, I suppose we have enough to pass the notability bar. I don't see a strong pass, but it's there. Oaktree b (talk) 20:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I am the reviewer for this AfC submission. While reviewing, I mulled over the same criteras as per the nom. but as per AfC reviewing instructions and scope, I decided to accept the article based on the facts that (a) Bloomberg article met the criteria of a reliable, independent source and has more than passing mention. It identifies his expertise and verifies the information contained in the article. (b) TechCrunch, while an interview, captures some notability, (c) he is regularly present on Fox Business/CNBC (cosidered reliable) news segments as an expert on Crypto topics, (d) and upon further search, sources may exist such as Coindesk (ack. WP:RS). — WeWake (talk) 20:56, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Further sources: (a) He was the judge for "Forbes Cryptocurrency Awards 2020", (b) Business Insider coverage of his Bitcoin Investor Week conference, (c) and sustained coverage as a founder and cryptocurrency expert/investor in Reuters (1 2), misc. finance news 3, for example. — WeWake (talk) 22:24, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article is poorly developed, and the subject is not well known, except for his attempt to destroy Snapchat. Kailash29792 (talk) 23:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

:I appreciate the feedback so far and the opportunity to respond. I’d like to begin by clarifying that I am not involved in any form of paid editing or promotional activity. I’m an independent editor based in Africa. The subject of the article is completely unaware of my existence, as I came across the profile while researching a cryptocurrency topic and was surprised to find no Wikipedia entry despite various respected sources and a Google knowledge panel. That was what first inspired me to draft the article.

I’m still fairly new to creating Wikipedia pages, and this submission was part of a learning process (learning how to contribute to global knowledge beyond optimization). Because crypto is my area of expertise, I naturally gravitated toward that subject when experimenting. Admittedly, my early drafts may have shown inexperience, but each iteration has been an attempt to align better with Wikipedia’s standards, particularly in sourcing, neutrality, and notability.

Based on past feedback, I made a conscious decision to avoid citing crypto-only sources, even when more abundant, and instead prioritized mainstream, non-crypto-specific outlets such as Bloomberg, WSJ, TechCrunch, and Forbes.

As one of the reviewing editors correctly observed, the Bloomberg article is a strong indicator of notability. It goes beyond a passing mention by discussing the subject’s role in a public company IPO, referencing his expertise and leadership within the field. This is consistent with WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH, which recognize reliable business coverage as a valid measure of notability when it provides meaningful, independent context.

The WSJ article, while about a workplace dispute, nonetheless documents a verifiable part of the subject’s professional history and is neither trivial nor promotional. As noted by Oaktree b, its reliability as a source alone justifies inclusion and is not grounds for deletion under A7.

While TechCrunch and Forbes contain elements of direct commentary or interviews, they still reflect the subject’s relevance within their professional sphere, particularly within the tech startup and crypto ecosystem. Interview formats do not disqualify sources from notability considerations when they are not promotional and are hosted by reliable, editorially controlled platforms, as is the case here.

Another editor also rightly noted that the subject has appeared on Fox Business and CNBC as a crypto analyst. These are mainstream financial media outlets with editorial standards, and such appearances are a strong indicator of professional recognition, even if individual transcripts weren't included in the current draft.

I also made an effort to include critical coverage, specifically citing the WSJ article that referenced a firing, to avoid creating a flattering narrative. That should demonstrate a commitment to neutrality and to presenting a complete, balanced view, not promotion.

If there are remaining concerns about tone or structure, I fully welcome constructive suggestions on how to improve the article, not simply remove it.

My goal is to contribute to global knowledge from my small corner of the world and to improve Wikipedia by participating in good faith. Dismissing this effort as “routine news” or “promotion” without offering improvement guidance risks discouraging new editors who are genuinely trying to engage with the platform.

I believe the subject meets the notability criteria, as supported by multiple independent, reliable sources that give more than passing mentions. If aspects of the article need refinement, I’m happy to revise. But I respectfully disagree that deletion or A7 tagging is the right course of action.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this discussion, positively or critically. I am here to learn, improve, and contribute constructively to the platform and its mission. Olaseni Kehinde Precious 1 (talk) 18:29, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Garrett

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

There is only one example of WP:SIGCOV of this tech businessperson, this profile in the San Francisco Standard. The rest of the coverage is WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS (e.g. [6], [7], [8]), affiliated sources (e.g. [9]) or WP:PRIMARYSOURCES ([10], [11]). He does not inherit notability from his mother's step-brother or grandfather. May well be notable someday but the sources don't support WP:GNG or WP:NBIO now. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:07, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Basketball, Technology, and Kansas. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:07, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This seems like an unnecessary request, and feels like a personal attack. There are multiple articles on, or mentioning this famous venture capitalist investor and former basketball player. I found this page informative as I was listening to a podcast he was on and I came here to learn more about him. 217.110.185.242 (talk) 23:23, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. There are multiple WP:SIGCOV of this tech businessperson that I just added, from his past as a basketball player, as well as currently as a tech investor. See recently added citations such as this, this, this, this, and this. Happy to add more. ImagoDei137 (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Taiwan Plus is a Q&A interview and thus a primary source. KUSports.com reported on him when he was a KU student and thus it's not an independent source. The YouTube links are also Q&A interviews, as is the Wichita Eagle piece. None of these sources is GNG-qualifying SIGCOV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:05, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
His mother also wrote about her son in her book. There’s also another article I researched about him that I will add. This seems like a waste of time and I agree with the other comment, something personal which is not in the spirit of Wikipedia.https://www.cynthiagarrett.org/prodigaldaughter ImagoDei137 (talk) 09:57, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A mother cannot possibly be an independent source on her son, and independent sourcing is required for determining notability. I would ask that participants here refrain from casting WP:ASPERSIONS about personal attacks and actions not in the spirit of Wikipedia and stay focused on the subject's notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:58, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:40, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miracle over the Mojave

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

I don't see any standalone notability for this aircraft flight by Nathan Fielder for his TV show. While there are multiple media stories about it, they are all based entirely on interviews with Fielder and thus are WP:PRIMARYSOURCES, not independent secondary coverage (see [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]) or are literally primary (FlightAware). Even the title of the article (Miracle over the Mojave) is attributed to Fielder, not to any secondary coverage. A WP:BLAR to The_Rehearsal_(TV_series)#Season_2_(2025) was contested, so seeking an AfD consensus for this redirect as an alternative to deletion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Aviation, and California. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. Insufficient standalone notability, and in any case adequately covered at the proposed target. Even if independent secondary sources were to be be found, WP:NOPAGE applies. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

72 virgins

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

This is just an islamophobic WP:POVFORK of Houri and Palestinian suicide attacks with no content whatsoever other than a quote from the book Sunan al-Tirmidhi and an immediate "In popular culture" and an excerpt of the "72 virgins" section of the Palestinian suicide attacks article 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 14:03, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 14:03, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that the article used to be a disamb page that clearly listed it as a misconception before Closetside decided to change it completely 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 14:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Support per nom. R3YBOl (🌲) 14:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:34, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a well-known legitimate Islamic teaching, graded as hasan (good). We can include the view of some that emphasizing the literal interpretation is Islamophobic, but we must include the traditional view that this teaching is legitimate and was spoken by Muhammad. If quoting a real Islamic teaching, which many find objectionable, is Islamophobic, quoting Leviticus 18:22 is antisemitic and quoting Romans 1:26-27 is Christophobic - a ludicrous position. Closetside (talk) 15:04, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There Are No 72 Virgins Waiting for Anyone in Paradise, and this article is false. Not a single islamic source calls it a legitimate teaching (other than isis, and they aren't even muslims) 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:17, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The teaching is traditionally accepted. See its hasan designation or Islam Q&A. While some scholars (like the one referenced above) rejects it, this is not the traditional view.

Off topic, ISIS is an Islamic terrorist organization. Just because the vast majority of imams reject their interpretation of Islam doesn't mean that they aren't Muslims. This is equivalent to saying the Crusaders weren't Christian due to their antisemitic massacres because Christian antisemitism has been rejected today by the vast majority of Christian scholars, or Sabbatai Zevi wasn't a religious Jew because the vast majority of Jewish scholars rejected his claim to be Messiah. Closetside (talk) 16:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The perceived legitimacy of the tenet is utterly irrelevant. If sources report on it, including arguing against it, it exists in some form. @Abo Yemen, the link you provided therefore wholly supports that this is an existing concept. Geschichte (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore to disamb page: This is clearly a WP:POVFORK and if it weren't for the fact that something useful existed prior to closetside's POV pushing, I'd recommend deleting. As something useful previously existed I'd suggested restoring to that. TarnishedPath^talk 16:29, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agnes Gallus

AfDs for this article:

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

Article previously deleted in November 2024 before being recreated in draft form this winter and then moved back into mainspace about two weeks ago, but still not properly sourcing any meaningful claim to passing WP:NARTIST. As always, artists are not "inherently" notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on third-party coverage and analysis about them, but this is still based mostly on the exact same primary sources as the first time -- gallery shows sourced to the self-published websites of the galleries that held them rather than GNG-worthy coverage about the shows, a piece about her life and death written by her own daughter, and on and so forth.
The very few new sources that have been added still aren't reliable or GNG-worthy either, however: there's a PDF copy of a book that apparently has one of her drawings in it, where we would need to see media reporting "Agnes Gallus drawing selected for inclusion in book" as a news story to deem her notable for that, and there's her paid-inclusion obituary in the newspaper classifieds.
There's still nothing here that would be "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to pass GNG on much, much better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:09, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Possible COI? See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Harrietchan. Family? PamD 07:59, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've undeleted the previous version to give editors visibility of what has been before so that their thinking can be informed. Schwede 66 23:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback, @Bearcat. I understand and appreciate Wikipedia’s policies around notability and reliable sourcing, especially in accordance with WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG. That said, I would like to respond to a few points regarding the article in question:

Substantial Revisions: After the article was deleted the first time in November 2024, I significantly revised and expanded the content to better support notability. The second version has undergone considerable editorial improvement thanks to the thoughtful contributions of @buysomeapples, who helped refine its tone and structure.

New Sources: While I acknowledge that some sources may still be borderline under WP:GNG standards, I’ve actively worked to include more third-party references. Some of these include published catalogues, archived media pieces, and mentions in group exhibition reviews—not just self-published gallery pages. I’m continuing to search for stronger secondary coverage and am open to suggestions on more specific types of sources that would help meet the bar.

Concerns About Bias: I want to gently raise that the recurring deletion of this article—despite ongoing efforts to improve it—feels disheartening, particularly in light of the many articles on male artists with similar levels of coverage that remain on the platform. While I fully support Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing policies, I hope we can also be mindful of how systemic bias can unintentionally influence these decisions. My intention is not to accuse any individual editor but to invite a broader reflection on how we apply notability standards consistently across gender lines.

I remain committed to improving this article in line with Wikipedia’s guidelines and am grateful for any constructive advice or mentorship on how best to proceed. Harrietcyy (talk) 14:01, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does have a gender imbalance but it's guidelines are applied equally to everyone. If you know of any articles about male artists that don't meet guidelines, those should also be improved or deleted. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak keep I accepted the draft because it seemed to meet WP:NARTIST 4 and because Ref 1 seems substantial enough (Saskatchewan: Art and Artists) seemed substantial enough. I won't be bothered if this gets deleted though, it's a borderline case even if it is interesting. BuySomeApples (talk) 09:14, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear; Saskatchewan Art and Artists is a biographical sketch in a non-WP:GNG-worthy directory self-published by a gallery she was directly affiliated with — and even if we ignore all of those problems and accept it anyway just because it seems "substantial", it still takes a lot more than just one notability-supporting source to establish passage of GNG. So that wasn't a solid notability-locking source to begin with, and wouldn't be enough all by itself regardless. Bearcat (talk) 15:15, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair, NARTIST #4d was the main thing that made up my mind but I can see how it's an edge case. I wouldn't say that it meets GNG at all. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:16, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Citation 1 - Saskatchewan: Art and Artists is connected to two separate major Saskatchewan galleries, the Norman Mackenzie Gallery and the Regina Public Library (Dunlop Gallery) - her work was collected/shown at both of these galleries. These are professional, not personal affiliations. That’s what art galleries do - they publish biographical information about noteworthy artists in their collections. These are highly regarded galleries which makes her inclusion noteworthy.

Citation 3 - SKNAC - Saskatchewan Network for Art Collectors - is a separate organization. Again, evidence she is recognized by this group as a noteworthy artist in Saskatchewan.

Citation 6 - the publication of her work in Kate Waterhouse’s book is an example that her work was published in an independent booklet with no personal affiliation.

Citation 7 - her work was exhibited posthumously by SK Arts - a respected organization. This citation was added to address an earlier query from the previously deleted Wikipedia entry requesting “proof” she did in fact exhibit her work at notable galleries

Citation 8 - another posthumous exhibit organized by a separate organization, the Saskatchewan Arts Council, again, addressing query re: Citation 7

Citation 9 - again, addressing query re: her work in permanent collections, in this case the University of Regina - again, a separate organization. Her work is part of the prestigious “Presidents’ Collection” as part of a donation by Morris Schumiatcher, a noteworthy lawyer, art patron and art collector.

Clearly, there are several notability-supporting sources, as above, re: her work collected and exhibited in several notable Saskatchewan galleries and organizations, namely the Norman Mackenzie Gallery, the Regina Public Gallery, the Saskatchewan Arts Board a.k.a. Saskatchewan Network for Art Collectors, the University of Regina President’s Collection I do not understand how his is “borderline”.

If the concern is re: personal affiliations, I suggest removing Citation 2. Harrietcyy (talk) 19:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes artist notability with works being in the Dunlop and Mackenzie gallery collections. Sourcing seems fine. Oaktree b (talk) 15:22, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Directed infinity

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

There is only one source, from the website Wolfram, which itself doesn't quote any other sources. I found nothing about it when roaming the internet for information (except this WP article, and the Wolfram post). Moreover, the "rules for manipulation" look like original work, and are mathematically unsound. 𝓔𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓹𝔂 fighter ^💬 09:37, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:40, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. If this does have a proper definition anywhere, I suspect it's in the context of contour integration (e.g. the contours used to define functional calculi for unbounded sectorial operators) and/or conformal mapping (e.g. the Schwarz–Christoffel mapping). I haven't found anything concrete along these lines though. Preimage (talk) 08:25, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 13:55, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of general secretaries of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam

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

Fails WP:GNG, I propose it to be deleted and merged with All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 01:32, 22 May 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 May 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:50, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Lists of people, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:14, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Searches have turned up sufficient in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support that the General Secretary of the AIADMK meets the WP:GNG notability guideline. Reliable sources are cited to verify this. Since 1977, individuals holding this position have played significant roles in both Indian national and state-level politics. They have influenced key political alliances — supporting the Janata Party government in 1979, the Congress government under Narasimha Rao in 1991, and the BJP-led government in 1998. AIADMK, under its General Secretary, has allied with national parties multiple times, impacting national outcomes. Notably, from 2014 to 2016, the General Secretary led AIADMK as the third largest party in Parliament with over 50 MPs across both houses. Kalpana Sundar ^Talk 07:06, May 23, 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:54, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 13:55, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jasmin Koč

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

Without any professional league appearances, this men's footballer is certainly not notable. The closest sources that are not routine announcements are Danas and Sportski Žurnal, interviews with little independent analysis. My searches in Serbian Cyrillic (Јасмин Коч) likewise didn't show any in-depth coverage of him. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Serbia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Mount Handrin

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

Two of the three sources provided lack page numbers, making verification of specific claims impossible per WP:VERIFY. The article contains detailed tactical descriptions and casualty figures that cannot be verified against the cited sources. The writing style also raises concerns - AI detection tools (including GPTZero) indicate a high probability (100%) of AI generation text in the article, with template-like prose and generic military terminology lacking specific historical details expected from reliable sources. The combination of unverifiable content and questionable sourcing fails to meet Wikipedia's standards per WP:RS and WP:V. R3YBOl (🌲) 13:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Iraq. Shellwood (talk) 13:23, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JACKSNNZ

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

Unreferenced stub (well, just a general ref, no footnotes). Uncler how this meets WP:GNG/WP:SIGCOV. My BEFORE shows some mentions in passing here or there, but noting in-depth. _{Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here} 13:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. _{Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here} 13:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Liz Tomkins

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

Non notable filmmaker. Coming from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judd Tilyard (her collaborator) which has the same issues as here. Copying in part from User:Bearcat from that afd,

WP:BLP of a filmmaker, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing WP:CREATIVE. As always, filmmakers are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show evidence of passing WP:GNG on third party coverage and analysis about them and their work -- but existence is the only notability claim being attempted here, this was referenced primarily to her films' entries in IMDb (which is not a notability-assisting source) .... Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass GNG on better referencing than this.

Adding other sources found in the article similarly lack coverage about her and a search failed to find anything better.
She unfortunately very recently passed away but that is only sourced to her former employers tribute, thus lacking independence. Other than reproducing the WIFT statement her death does not appear to have generated any independent coverage in the press. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:54, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 13:24, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lissa Lauria

AfDs for this article:

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

Primary sourced promotion for non notable musician / actress. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. No good roles for NACTOR. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 12:52, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Roles must be trivial, as I can't see anything about them online. I'm not sure how she "stars" in the Rosie O'Donnell show, might have been a guest at one point. The recording career also appears non-notable with no charted singles or any sort of critical review. Oaktree b (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ashitha Revolt 1843

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

Fails WP:GNG. No sources on this exist. None of the sources in use in this article support 99% of the text in this article 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 18:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 18:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bro what? The sources are cited, read them, you have no valid reason to issue a speedy deletion. There are multiple sources on this, reported by even contemporary missionaries. Stop excluding the cited sources; which are enough to make the page stay. 2A02:AA1:115D:84B3:ACB2:8E83:1328:5261 (talk) 18:54, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – how are all the sources fake? DataNomad (talk) 19:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the Wiki page has its sources, no reason for deletion, Jsanihsjsn (talk) 20:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through the sources, Aboona 2008 devotes an entire section spanning several pages to "Armed Revolt at Asheetha, November 1843". The Seyfo Center devotes 3 paragraphs to a revolt in 1843. Nala4u.com seems to be of dubious reliability, and citations 2-5 are incomplete to the point of being almost useless, but I think there's enough to go on from the first two to surmise that additional sources likely exist, albeit potentially using different spellings of Ashitha and not necessarily calling it "Revolt" in a canonical sense. The article does indulge in unencyclopedic tone, although it is worth noting that our best source thus far, Aboona 2008, does describe atrocities at length. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – It has good sources describing in detail what happened and it was an important event that took place in Hakkari in the 1800s. Termen28 (talk) 23:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Support per nom. R3YBOl (talk) 12:50, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: some specific discussion of what the sourcing looks like would be helpful
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:49, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naukatola Raxaul

AfDs for this article:

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

Lacks significant coverage; no reason found to justify its inclusion.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 12:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 12:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kunal Singh Rathore

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

This cricketer lacks coverage in reliable secondary sources, so he fails WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 04:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: He is referred to as Kunal Rathore without the middle name in other articles. Jay 💬 08:29, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is prose at the CricInfo profile linked at the bottom of the article. Not a huge amount but some. Given that he's played int he IPL I'd be very surprised if sources didn't exist to be honest Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:27, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now. Till date, He didn't play an international match. Thus, as per WP:NCRICKET he isn't notable and fails to show WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Fade258 (talk) 12:52, 5 June 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 14:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Everything Is A OK: A Dallas, TX Punk Documentary

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

Fails WP:NFILM DonaldD23 talk to me 10:34, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Music, United States of America, and Texas. DonaldD23 talk to me 10:34, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I couldn't find anything out there other than what's already in the article. I did add some content and an interview in hopes of finding more, but again, nothing. If we had a good redirect target I suppose it could redirect there, but List of documentary films specifies that they must be notable films and I've never had any sort of answer on whether or not we could add and redirect films to the given film's year specific page for List of American films. So with no other alternatives that I can see, as the director doesn't appear to pass NCREATIVE and we have no page on the punk rock scene in Dallas, this will have to be a delete on my end. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:58, 29 May 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 12:34, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Even director is not notable. Fade258 (talk) 13:09, 5 June 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.

Tahzeeb Hafi

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

Not a notable poet, writer, and engineer. Fails Wp:GNG.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 12:30, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Pakistan. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 12:30, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Polya's shire theorem

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

References are too sparse to support a full article, and I find no good place to merge this to. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:35, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. UtherSRG (talk) 11:35, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm not sure why you think too sparse. For example, a Google scholar search [17] doesn't seem to support "sparse". (Note all those papers specifically about the theorem are independent of Polya.) -- Taku (talk) 12:11, 29 May 2025 (UTC) This article [18] cites two textbooks for the theorem. A textbook coverage (besides scholary works) is usually good enough for Wikipedia to cover a theorem. Taku (talk) 13:08, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:29, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Greenlee

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

All I was able to find on this basketball player was this interview with the subject and this interview with his parents, which I don't believe warrant a standalone article. JTtheOG (talk) 07:32, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, North Macedonia, Florida, and Minnesota. JTtheOG (talk) 07:32, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not seeing sufficient independent SIGCOV to pass WP:NSPORT/WP:GNG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There appears to be very little coverage of this individual beyond primary sources Garsh (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (with work) - May meet notability due to FAU Final Four run. 1. trivial mention. 2. Televion interview. 3. Good source, notable mention. 4. Half discusses career, in short WPTV article. 5. Trivial mention, part of team that went to final 4 and contributed as a player. 6. Trivial mention in indep.article. 7. Interview (uni page)

Wq4m820 (talk) 21:14, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Found some coverage at [[19]], [[20]], and [[21]]. Let'srun (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- 1: team-specific microblog (Owls247.com), author graduated from the same uni in 2023, also just 3 sentences of direct coverage
- 2: routine interview from unreliable source (WP:SPORTSKEEDA), also just 2 sentences of direct coverage
- 3: routine coverage from a reliable source
JTtheOG (talk) 20:27, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 11:44, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:29, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sustainable cemetery

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

This has a number of scholarly sources but still feels like a WP:NOTESSAY failure. Based on the formatting, I also suspect a LLM was used to generate at least some of the content. MidnightMayhem 12:19, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sure, it could do with editing for tone/style, but it's by far not the most egregious example I've seen. It reads a bit like something written for a college class, but not like an essay in the sense of a think piece or opinion piece -- it's close enough to Wikipedia article structure to be salvageable via copy editing. Thus, IMO it's not so bad as to require burning down and starting over. It's an encyclopedic topic with significant coverage and pretty good sourcing, and like all our articles, will be improved over time. -- Avocado (talk) 16:15, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry About Your Daughter

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

Aside from that nice little piece of local interest coverage in Billboard, I couldn't find any reliable coverage of this band. Local papers (mostly student papers) had some concert listings, but nothing substantial. Article was PRODed back in 2017, but it was removed without explanation. There have been no substantial additions since then, and this really should've been deleted at the time. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:39, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Washington, D.C.. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:39, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This was the only mention of the band I could find [22]. I don't think we have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Earl of Rothes (Baronage of Scotland)

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

From my research, this seems to be a paid-for "title" sold by a variety of 'heritage' companies. The article creates a deliberate confusion with the Earl of Rothes, which is a real heriditary title in the Peerage of Scotland. The article implies there was somehow a split between the "peerage" title and the "feudal" title of Earl of Rothes, which would allow the "feudal" title to be bestowed on someone else. No source is given for that claim.

The current "holder" of the title is supposedly a guy with Swiss and Antigua & Barbuda citizenship with a peacock article, a bunch of other weird awards and titles, and no connections to Scotland whatsoever.

The article itself wasn't created until December 2024 by the account Royalorders whose main task seems to be to anchor the claim into a variety of Wiki pages.

I can find no reliable sources that back up the claim that this title even exists, how and why it's different from the established Earl of Rothes, and who the current "holder" is. The only consistent source is a list from registryofscotsnobility.com, a nondescript and unverifiable website without listed owners or administrators, and which is likely just another forum for those who bought these kinds of titles. It's also noteworthy that the public agenda of the next meeting of the 'Registry of Scots Nobility' specifically mentions the creation of Wikipedia pages of their 'titles' as a success. All looks very fishy to me. — Arcaist ^(contr ^—talk) 11:05, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Royalty and nobility, and Scotland. — Arcaist ^(contr ^—talk) 11:05, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Antiglobalization activists in Syria

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

Possibly not notable. GZWDer (talk) 10:40, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Syria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This has existed since 2006, but was never sourced. — Maile (talk) 12:45, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DeHaat

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

No sources with SIGNIFICANT Coverage; basically we have only news on raises of money, Indian startup achievements, and acquisitions. NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 10:03, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Technology, and Bihar. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Desta Global

AfDs for this article:

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

If one checks Google News and other news, the company cannot be named notable. Just random here and there blogs, mentions, wp:churnalism, newswire releases, WOW award, RMAI Flame award. The previous discussion was not representative and resulted in no consensus. Many of the sources have been already removed as spam. NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 10:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Technology, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of libertarianism

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

I'm by no means a fan of dedicated criticism articles, but I think this takes the cake as one of the worst ones. This article was created 20 years ago as a POV fork of the libertarianism article and has since been indiscriminately collecting together a series of criticisms without any connection to one another. The article reads as a long repetitive list of "This person says libertarianism is bad for this reason", followed by a lengthy quote, and cited almost exclusively to primary sources, without any reliable secondary sources to provide a throughline. A cursory search on Google Scholar doesn't come up with many sources that are specifically about the criticism of libertarianism, which is instead covered within the context of the subject as a whole.

Article deletion was raised some time ago, but nothing ultimately came of it, so I thought I'd open a discussion about it now. I don't think this article serves any value to our readers as it currently exists, it is just a fork with an inherently non-neutral POV. Any relevant overarching criticisms specific to libertarianism can easily be integrated into the main article, and the individual opinions of philosophers can be merged into their own articles. Obviously I'd be happy to hear out any alternatives to deletion people might have, and possible ways to improve the article, but right now I don't see a way of fixing its fundamental issues. Grnrchst (talk) 09:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Libertarianism, and Politics. Grnrchst (talk) 09:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of surnames in Ukraine

AfDs for this article:

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

Fully unsourced, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Absolutiva (talk) 09:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Ukraine. Shellwood (talk) 09:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, we are not Namepedia. Geschichte (talk) 15:45, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Kliff

AfDs for this article:

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

Page was deleted after an AfD discussion in 2021, and recently recreated. I can't see the old version to know if this is a G4 situation, but I do not see any sources beyond those discussed in the 2021 AfD, and do not think much has changed. Bringing back to AfD for clarity. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 20:05, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Journalism, and New York. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 20:05, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sources aren't sufficient to meet WP:GNG, just like last time. - MrOllie (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Admin comment to answer a point the nominator raised: this is substantially different to the 2021 article so should be discussed on its merits. G4 does not apply. Star Mississippi 01:43, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This is a well-known journalist who has non-trivial coverage from multiple reliable independent sources. Here are examples, which include an interview on NPR:

Sarah Kliff brings transparency to ER prices, one hospital bill at a time - Columbia Journalism Review

Healthcare policy journalist Sarah Kliff talks Obamacare legacy, coronavirus - The Princetonian

Republicans Want To Get Rid Of Obamacare. But Then What? : NPR

These, plus other sources, suggest that she satisfies WP:GNG. I add that she also frequently appears in the media as an independent expert beyond her reporting role:

Breaking down the House GOP health care bill - CBS News

Obamacare open enrollment set to begin as Trump officials try to upend health care law wikicreativity (talk) 16:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Student newspaper articles and interviews with the biography subject do not build the case for notability. Just like last time around. MrOllie (talk) 16:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: I can see why this was an AfD nomination as the article isn't sourced properly, as most sources, while reliable, are primary and not independent secondary ones. And it's really hard to find sources about a subject who is also a prolific writer as one has to weed through and not consider authored articles. Regarding sources mentioned so far, I don't see why the Columbia Journalism Review and The Princetonian articles presented above by the article's author don't count as sources. The first is an interview although has introductory secondary coverage. The second has a lot of quotes which some editors don't like. But I'd count them. Here are some more: This article [23] discusses Kliff's views on the ACA and give some background on her. This has a review [24] of a NYT article she wrote with a colleague. The Nieman Lab published this article [25] about Kliff and a piece she wrote for JAMA. I think in sum these may meet WP:BASIC but only the Columbia Journalism Review source is in the article. I think this article has potential but needs to be Draftified and re-worked to include sources and verify claims. Let's first see if editors think it meets BASIC like I do. Nnev66 (talk) 21:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: In accordance with WP:JOURNALIST, Kliff "is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors" in the area of health policy. She is frequently interviewed in the media and especially in audio or video, so I'm not sure how accessible a lot of that media is. Because of her notability and media prominence, she has 128k followers on Twitter. A Reddit "Ask me anything" from 2019 has 19k upvotes and 1.5k comments. ScienceFlyer (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NJOURNALIST, which simply requires the subject "is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers". A whole frickin' episode of Fresh Air devoted to her is clearly shows she is "widely cited by peers". And there is nothing wrong with student newspapers per se. In this case, Columbia Journalism Review isn't even a student paper, while The Daily Princetonian is older and more highly-respected than many non-student papers. Toadspike [Talk] 22:40, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like emerging consensus is clearly on the keep side. I may have been too hasty in my nomination (I see for example that G4 had already been considered and rejected in the viewable article history), although I also note that the sources considered here are pretty much the same as the ones found lacking in 2021. For myself, I find the framing put forth by Nnev66 and Toadspike reasonably convincing. Remark that many of the sources considered are interviews, but e.g. CJR and Fresh Air are weighty sources that one should take seriously. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 06:35, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sarah Kliff is a notable American journalist. I found this to demonstrate her notability: [26], [27], [28]. CresiaBilli (talk) 11:26, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(For the record, those are the first three links posted by Creativitywiki above, not new sources.) Toadspike [Talk] 17:34, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A detailed review of independent sources would be helpful, remembering that interviews are not independent sources and so do not contribute toward notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for me, the interviews are not convincing to establish GNG, but a case can be made for NJOURNALIST, that she is "widely cited by peers". Neimanlab and this report are clearly sigcov on her reporting. Then, the CJR article and NPR episode are good sources to demonstrate her recognition as an expert in her field. Combined with sources like this article (Wichita Eagle), this response (by a professor, I think), I'd say she easily passes the NJOURNALIST bar. (note that most of these sources were listed by !voters above)
There's other non-independent sources that could be used to flesh out an article, such as a profile by her alma mater, NYT announcement, so I'm not concerned that we cannot have an encyclopedic article here.
As an aside, I really don't think student journalism can count as reliable reporting that would be indicative of notability though, even one like The Daily Princetonian. As an undergrad, I published some things in Ivy League level undergraduate publications that got literally no peer review. And undergrads can't be trusted to reliably review things anyways. But there's enough here beyond that Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 10:32, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources are not great, and I'm not even seeing enough to meet WP:BASIC. Most of what is available is WP:PRIMARY or from sources that are not considered reliable. However, the subject meets WP:JOURNALIST, and seems notable in her profession.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:29, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Junie Yu

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

Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Suffers from WP:BOMBARD. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 08:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Philippines. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 08:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While I can understand the nominator's concern about "WP:BOMBARD" given the initial article creation, it's worth assessing the subject's actual notability separately from how the article came to be.

If Junie Yu indeed meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines (specifically for politicians, WP:NPOLITICIAN, and general notability, WP:GNG) through verifiable, independent sources, then the article should be kept. The focus should be on the subject's notability, not on the initial submission process.

Let's evaluate based on policy, not just initial impressions.

1bisdak (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Karen Gondoly

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

While reviewing, I did not find anything close to good reliable or significant coverage of the person (CEO of the company which does not have its own Wikipedia page). 50% or more of the sources are from the company Cinder painter (talk) 08:50, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Women. Shellwood (talk) 09:20, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Snow & Voices

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

I am unable to find sufficient coverage of this musical group to meet WP:NMUSIC. All I found were passing mentions like 1. JTtheOG (talk) 08:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. JTtheOG (talk) 08:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nomination —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 08:52, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tadesse Wolde-Medhin

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

Mass created LUGSTUB. Fails WP:NSPORTS due to lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources.

Searching the subject's name in Roman characters brought up only the usual mirrors. An additional search on Eastmain's MENA Newspaper database also found no hits. A search of the internet archive brought up this communist with the same name, but they are clearly not the subject of this article.

We don't have any record of the subject's name in Amharic, but I attempted to generate one using Google Translate (ታደሰ ወልደ መድህን), however since I obviously don't speak Amharic I cannot vouch for the accuracy of this name. Searching it brought up a mention of someone by that name meeting with East German officials in this 1969 copy of the Addis Zemen newspaper, but this does not appear to be the subject. However, this does show that there are at least some Amharic language newspapers online that will be uncovered by a Google search. Looking at the other editions of this newspaper in this archive, it appears that Addis Zemen was a publication of less than a dozen pages without regular substantial sports coverage, primarily focused on covering officialdom. The lack of Google searching coming across newspaper coverage of Ethiopian athletes during this period is therefore potentially explicable by the main Ethiopian government-owned/controlled newspapers of the time just not covering sports substantially/in detail.

Given that average life expectancy in Ethiopia is ~65, the subject is likely dead already, but no sign of obituaries could be found. FOARP (talk) 08:28, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Ethiopia. FOARP (talk) 08:28, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Didn't find significant coverage in mentioned references. Thus, fails to meet general notability guidelines, significant coverage and sports people. Fade258 (talk) 08:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ethiopia at the 1972 Summer Olympics#Athletics – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 16:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indigenous Australians

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

This is a duplicate of the Aboriginal Australians article Ashmoo (talk) 08:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 09:20, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Aboriginal Australians does not include Torres Strait Islanders. Indigenous Australians has a separate meaning including Islanders. LibStar (talk) 09:30, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, ideally speedy keep as the deletion rationale is clearly erroneous. As the article explains in its hatnote, Aboriginal Australians are one of two distinct groups of Indigenous Australians, alongside Torres Strait Islanders. Calling the two articles (which have existed since 2002 and 2008) duplicates is like saying that we can’t have an article about the United Kingdom because it’s a duplicate of the article about England. The article on Indigenous Australians could obviously use some editing to cut down on duplicative material, but we should absolutely have an article about Indigenous Australians collectively - e.g. for the same reason that we have an article on Indigenous peoples in Canada in addition to articles on each of the three groups of Indigenous Canadians. MCE89 (talk) 10:07, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Indigenous Australians are a superset of Aboriginal Australians, as stated in the second sentence. That being said, there is a lot of duplication, and there is probably scope for summarising much of the duplicate material in Indigenous Australians, letting the main articles (Aboriginal Australians and Torres Strait Islanders) cover the specifics of those peoples and letting Indigenous Australians focus on the commonalities between them. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As I see it, Aboriginal Australians refers to a distinct people and culture and Indigenous Australians refers to the interactions of that culture as well as Torres Strait Islanders as perceived by the Australian state. They are distinct topics. The Voivodeship King (talk) 13:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dilraj Singh Rawat

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG, no in-depth coverage from multiple independent sources, also the article is little promotional, may be a fan creation. GrabUp - Talk 08:04, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails to pass WP:ANYBIO, WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Fade258 (talk) 08:52, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Internet, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Did a search myself and didn't find anything that would lend notability. Only thing I can imagine is that there are non-English sources available. nf utvol (talk) 12:19, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Mentions, primary, WP:NEWSORGINDIA or otherwise unusable sourcing is all I find. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

God's Revelation to the Human Heart

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

Current sources appears to be passing mentions and bookstore descriptions. Both does not count towards WP:GNG, which does not appear to be fulfilled. A WP:BEFORE search also returned no results outside of passing mentions. Nothing in Newspapers.com about the book either.

The book exists, but there is almost no coverage of it by reliable sources outside of passing mentions. Proposing a redirect to the author. Pinging Myckaa, Moriwen for involvement with the failed PROD. Justi yaya 08:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, United States of America, and Alaska. Justi yaya 08:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Seraphim Rose: No standalone notability for this book. The review by Roosh Valizadeh appears on an WP:SPS blog ([29]) and the article in Religion (which is by Lackenby, not Gallaher as stated here) is not a review but a single WP:TRIVIALMENTION. (Works by the English theologian and bishop Kallistos Ware (such as The Inner Kingdom) and the American monk Seraphim Rose (such as his God's Revelation to the Human Heart) are amongst those which periodically come up in conversations.) The book exists, though, so no reason not to redirect the title to the article about its notable author. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Khankala (1735)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Battle of Khankala (1735) (2nd nomination)

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

Poorly sourced. The only source used is some book Хожаев, Д. (1998). Чеченец (in Russian). Khozhaev seems to be a Chechen field commander, brigadier general and doesn't seem to be a reliable source, since no degree in history. And I couldn't find the book on the Internet, must be WP:RSSELF. Devlet Geray (talk) 18:57, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Devlet Geray (talk) 18:57, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's first nomination in fact Devlet Geray (talk) 18:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:17, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't think "Poorly sourced" is in the Wikipedia:Deletion policy. More relevant is "articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources" and "articles for which thorough attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed". Has WP:BEFORE been done? I also am dubious that you have to have a degree in history or history books you write will be considered unreliable. It seems that plenty of authors have written histories without a formal degree in that subject (one even got a Nobel prize for theirs). But even in that case, our own article on Dalkhan Khozhaev states "In 1983 he graduated from the faculty of History of the Chechen-Ingush State University" and that he was a researcher at the Chechen-Ingush Republican Regional Museum, the author of works on the history of the national liberation movement of Chechnya in the 19th century and Head of the Archives Department. It seems strange you've copied "Chechen field commander, brigadier general" from the start of our article but chosen to edit that from the full description "Chechen historian, field commander, brigadier general and author with numerous works on the centuries-old confrontation between Chechnya and Russia". Given his publication history, he was an academic and writer before his military service, and continued the former during the latter. The article on the Russian wikipedia has quite a bit more on him and has a number of his books listed. The source used in the article is his 1998 «Чеченцы в Русско-Кавказской войне» (Chechens in the Russo-Caucasian War), published in Grozny by Seda Publishers (isbn and catalogue listing here). That you only suspect he might not be reliable, you assume that the source must be self published, these weren't really strong arguments for deletion without having done a proper WP:BEFORE. And given that these things have been disproven, there's nothing left in the nomination. Spokoyni (talk) 23:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'll also further add that Khozhaev's book is not "the only source used", there's another in the article, and a WP:BEFORE would have shown there were originally four sources in the article, two of which the original author later removed on the incorrect rationale that they did not add any additional content to what the other sources stated. Spokoyni (talk) 23:30, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I clearly wrote that he does not have a degree in history, he is not a specialist in the history of Chechnya (no PhD thesis). How can he be used as a source for a topic like this? Makes absolutely no sence. Moreover, the figures and data presented in the article are initially implausible. In addition, the links are given for show, since it is impossible to verify them. Plus, zero cross-wiki and no information on this "battle" on the Internet, makes the article absoulte original research Devlet Geray (talk) 21:47, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since none of that makes any sense, suggest speedy keep under "the nominator failed to give intelligible grounds for content deletion". He has a degree in history, he is a speciality on the history of Chechnya, and if you are suggesting only history books written by those with a phd in history are reliable, you need to go and change the entire nature of what makes a WP:RS. If you mean sources rather than links, they are published accounts and are verfiable (that you personally can't or won't verify them is not an acceptable reason). The absence of articles on other wikis is not a criteria for deletion here, nor is lack of google hits. You tried to get this speedied as a hoax, that was declined. Then you prodded it "because it never happened", and that was declined, and now you're attacking one of the two (out of originally four) sources in the article as a reason for deletion because the book's author doesn't have a phd. I can see your desire to get this deleted for some reason, I'm just not seeing any actual rationale for it. Why do you think this is a hoax, or an invented instance? Spokoyni (talk) 22:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:BURDEN, the burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution. Devlet Geray (talk) 23:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

‌‌‌‌‌Meanwhile, I found a pdf version of the book «Чеченцы в Русско-Кавказской войне» (Chechens in the Russo-Caucasian War), published in Grozny by Seda Publishers and there is no mention of such a "battle". Devlet Geray (talk) 23:59, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don’t see anything reliable that tells us this alleged battle ever took place. Mccapra (talk) 13:39, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD, not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seth Davis (musician)

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a drummer, and not found significant coverage to add in reliable, independent sources. There is some coverage in local papers, but otherwise mostly forums or other non-RS. I don't think he meets WP:NMUSICIAN, WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. No obvious redirect target. Tacyarg (talk) 06:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Louisiana. Tacyarg (talk) 06:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Highly promotional article full of just cringy language like "Davis has shared artist rosters with...", followed by what is basically promotion for a method. I don't see participation in any notable albums by notable artists, no solo albums or record contract, and no acceptable secondary sources. Drmies (talk) 15:23, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TATAA Biocenter

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

Relies almost entirely on primary sources. Unable to find any sources that show it meets WP:NCORP. The only secondary coverage is about an event - the former CEO being removed and suing a law firm that he says gave him bad counsel that led to his removal. But there’s no WP:INHERITORG from being associated with an event (and the event here does not even have sufficient enduring significance to qualify for a page under WP:Event in any case. I have a WP:COI as a paid consultant for WhiteHatWiki, which was hired by this company. I do not want to waste the time of volunteer editors to evaluate proposed corrections and edit requests on a page that does not qualify.) Brucemyboy1212 (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Biology, Medicine, and Sweden. Skynxnex (talk) 19:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sourcing is not particualrly strong. Notability is not clear. Does not seem to meet WP:NCORP. Ramos1990 (talk) 22:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment leaning keep - article definitely has an excessive detail problem, but they received some non-routine seeming coverage for their COVID-19 testing program (added 2 sources to article, although one isn't accessible w/o pressreader). Zzz plant (talk) 01:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of the sources you cited help the page meet notability standards as defined by WP:NCORP. One citation leads to a Wikipedia article and the other is a routine news announcement on a radio broadcast. Brucemyboy1212 (talk) 14:27, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It appears that the nominator may have been influenced more by a perceived conflict of interest (COI) issue than by the actual question of notability. The company in question was founded by Mikael Kubista, and similar patterns have occurred before. For example, on Mikael Kubista's own Wikipedia page, there was repeated removal of content related to a legal dispute involving TATAA Biocenter by SPA @ArtChomsky which was settled by an admin and the argument to remove a fact related TATAA there was irrational. A similar issue seems to be happening here—there appears to be an effort, possibly coordinated behind the scenes, to suppress certain information by removing pages from Wikipedia. This raises concerns about the integrity of the platform’s commitment to neutrality and transparency.

I urge editors to review this situation carefully, with special attention to the quality and relevance of the sources cited, to ensure that content is evaluated fairly and not unduly influenced by COI concerns or efforts to obscure verifiable information.ManIxal (talk) 06:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:32, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: They appear to have developed a pcr "thing" I don't really understand (https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/hum.2021.29195.bfs?journalCode=hum), with coverage here of it being used in an experiment [30]. Not sure how that affects notability, but there are several dozen hits in Gscholar using their name. Oaktree b (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This source comes up [31], it either reads as a company profile or a press release, but I don't know enough to !vote based on the sourcing I've found. Oaktree b (talk) 19:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
None of these sources helps establish notability for the company. The first source doesn’t even mention it except for in a footnote which cites to the company’s press release [32]; the second source is a student dissertation and the third is the company’s own marketing. Brucemyboy1212 (talk) 14:26, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last attempt to reach quorum, or at least a stronger endorsement of the nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:14, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: User:ManIxal You haven’t said anything about WP:NCORP and your sensitivity to the lawsuit suggests you might be a litigant. Do you have an undisclosed WP:COI? Brucemyboy1212 (talk) 14:22, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm more inclined towards a redirect to Mikael Kubista § TATAA Biocenter per WP:NOPAGE. Where sources are primarily focused on a single specific issue rather than the company as a whole, I see no reason why a separate standalone article would be required at this point in time. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: based on the discussion after the sources I identified above, I don't see enough coverage to show notabiltiy Oaktree b (talk) 15:31, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gyula Kakas

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

Fails WP:NSPORT due to lack of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. FOARP (talk) 08:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Hungary. FOARP (talk) 08:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hungary at the 1896 Summer Olympics#Gymnastics, where his name was mentioned. Corresponding article on Hungarian Wikipedia does not even contain significant coverage, whether online or archived. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect – Per above. Svartner (talk) 05:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Wow, two times in one day. I must be a lucky duck. Looks like the gymnastics class reunion will spill over to here too so can't leave out Sirfurboy and JoelleJay. I'm not even sure how to find Hungarian newspapers, but came across this nifty thing and looks like they have many hits for "Gyula Kakas" with sports-y looking documents and newspapers. Here's another search for "Gyula Kokas", which per our favorite Olympedia (and I guess Sports Reference too) he also went by. They have 136 and 165 hits respectively, none of which I can access. All that aside, the Hungarian Olympic Committee seems to have a fairly in-depth profile on him also. Seeing as how he participated in athletics (unofficial Hungarian pole vault record holder!) and soccer (yeah, yeah, 1 game for Budapesti TC), might make sense to also include those deletion thingies for those projects also. GauchoDude (talk) 18:20, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You do not need to ping me. I have the Sportspeople deletion sorting watch listed. Please stop pinging me everywhere. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:34, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. JoelleJay (talk) 19:51, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't done a complete search yet, but from a brief look, here's about a 100 words on him in a book from the 2000s ([33]) and then about ~350 words in a 1930s newspaper here, praising him as having "extraordinary skill, and [he] did gymnastics like no one else before him. He rose to fame with phenomenal speed and ... [his club] MTK was almost in mourning when he changed the blue and white colours for the red and white colours of BTC... Lightness, precise posture, inventiveness and virtuoso skill made Gyula Kakas, the best gymnast of his time, unrivalled...Few Hungarian champions were able to remain in the spotlight for as long as Gyula Kakas, and this was also a characteristic of his excellence." I'm about 99.9% certain he's notable, but will look further later. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:57, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:05, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mark A. Bragg

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

No evidence of notability from independent reliable sources, only from church sources[34]. The only independent sources are about the sad fate of his mother. Fram (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion, Latter Day Saints, and California. Fram (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BISHOPS and WP:CLERGY as a holder of an inherently notable position of religious leadership. Per the EL here, while a regular Mormon bishop is equivalent to a local pastor, a General Authority Seventy, which Mr. Bragg is, is a much senior position, with a scope easily equivalent to a Bishop in the Roman Catholic or Anglican traditions. As such, we know that appropriate coverage exists, whether or not we can find it and/or agree on whether coverage in LDS sources is independent. Jclemens (talk) 04:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For example SlTrib from earlier this year notes his position as "president of the faith’s North America West Area" which puts him above a Catholic archbishop in terms of adherents, clergy, area, and institutions overseen. Jclemens (talk) 04:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those are essays, not policies or guidelines. And the claim that coverage zxists is rather a weak claim for a US BLP, where coverage is normally easy to find if it exists. Fram (talk) 09:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They accurately reflect consensus. Point being that it's a waste of time for us to go digging through looking for stuff that's going to be there somewhere. There's simply no question that he has a ton of coverage from LDS sources which are some degree or another less than completely independent... but discounting all of that is needlessly Procrustean and anti-LDS. Notability has never been a policy, always a guideline, and sticklers for it in such cases can never really explain to me why an encyclopedia with oodles of pop stars, voice actors, etc. would be improved only by removing the leaders of religious denominations that are covered in the religious (non-independent) press, rather than nominally independent pop-culture sources. Jclemens (talk) 08:01, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you allow articles where all you have are non-independent sources, then there is no way to keep out all spam, vanity, self-promoting individuals and groups, ... A basic principle of Wikipedia is that we reflect and summarise what other reliable, independent sources have written, to get as close as possible to a neutral point of view and independently verified facts. Fram (talk) 09:26, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure there is. You rely on things like WP:BISHOPS to restrict, for example, bio coverage of major religious figures to the top 1-2% of clergy based on position and importance, rather than title. It's a parallel way to make sure we're not covering every self-promoting, self-declared apostle, but can e.g. cover regionally/nationally important figures. Jclemens (talk) 20:31, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please reread my last sentence. Fram (talk) 07:20, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As the creator of the article, I concur with Jclemens that Bragg is inherently notable per WP:CLERGY and WP:BISHOPS, being in a position equivalent to a Bishop in Catholicism or Anglicanism and "[being a] high level religious official with a substantial deal of power and autonomy, and they tend to play a substantial role in their local community, including interactions with public officials, the media, etc." PortlandSaint (talk) 08:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fram makes a very compelling argument that the assumption of independent reliable sources existing is problematic. 206.83.99.60 (talk) 03:01, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:04, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Mahbub E Khoda

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

Promotional and written by editors who are close to the subject, the editors' (@Asadpolash and @MahdiRiyad) maximum edits are on this article, and @Asadpolash uploads of several images in Commons for this article definitely have WP:COI and WP:FAN issues here. Also, most sources are unreliable and come from primary sources, so it's hard to verify the information. More reliable sources are needed for verification. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 14:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 14:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the structure of the article and the sources of information are correct. Therefore, I am in favor of keeping the article. MahdiRiyad (talk) 16:45, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum sources comes from unreliable sources and most likely from promotional website. For example these:[35][36][37][38][39] and many more in the article. I also think you are connected with the subject. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 16:56, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is been modified and guided by other editor which includes the removal of a large portion of words and facts so it doesn't look promotional. We have the track of that editing. That admin was from Australia and we obeyed every single editing provided. Now you're again here creating the mess putting unrelated tags saying the same thing.

Is it that you have personal clash with the subject as you're from the same country? it seems that you're way of processing has a connection of your personal grudges with the subject. Asadpolash (talk) 18:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum sources are unreliable (I already gave the links in an earlier reply), and you are saying personal grudges? How funny! I don't know him much. Your accounts' maximum edits are on this article and Dewanbag Sharif, the same subject, so you should disclose WP:COI. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 18:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This article meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines and is well-structured according to Wikipedia standards. The subject has received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, fulfilling the criteria set by WP:GNG. The references cited are verifiable and come from credible media outlets, supporting the article's factual accuracy and encyclopedic value. I strongly support keeping this page, and any issues should be resolved through constructive editing, not deletion. Hossain Muhammad (talk) 06:31, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Bangladesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:26, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: User Hossain Muhammad and user MahdiRiyad are the same user and blocked for sock puppetry.[40] He tried to manipulate this AfD with his sock account. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 22:29, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article is in terrible shape, probably due to COI, but the subject seems notable. Deletion is not clean up.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comment. Would you please remove the tag added on the beginning for the investigation so this looks okay and we can move forward with the translations.? Asadpolash (talk) 13:27, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:03, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article needs cleanup, but the subject is notable. Many people in Bangladesh love him blindly, so COI is possible. ― ☪ Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 13:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dewanbag Sharif

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

Promotional and written by editors who are close to the subject, the editors' (@Asadpolash and @MahdiRiyad) maximum edits are on this article, and @Asadpolash uploads of several images in Commons for this article definitely have WP:COI and WP:FAN issues here. Also, most sources are unreliable and come from primary sources, so it's hard to verify the information. More reliable sources are needed for verification. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 14:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 14:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the structure of the article and the sources of information are correct. Therefore, I am in favor of keeping the article. MahdiRiyad (talk) 16:51, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum sources comes from unreliable sources and most likely from promotional website.For example these:[41][42][43][44][45] and many more in the article. I also think you are connected with the subject. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 17:02, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I am not talking about WP:FAN, as it's not a valid reason for AFD. But, it's fulfilling the point of GNG as "Dewanbag Sharif" or related terms broadly used in newspapers like the BBC, Ittefaq, Prothom Alo and others. ― ☪ Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 01:00, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Only sources given in the article are not effective in AFD. You should have used Google and other searches before submitting a proposal. ― ☪ Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 01:02, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I already added 2 reliable sources with the update. But it's hard to verify most of the information with unreliable and primary sources. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 02:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject clearly meets the WP:GNG criteria, with multiple significant coverages in reliable and independent sources such as BBC, The Daily Star, Prothom Alo, and Ittefaq. It is a well-known religious organization in Bangladesh with a notable following and consistent presence in national media over many years. Deletion based on personal bias or perceived promotional tone violates WP:NPOV and is not a valid reason under deletion policy. If there are concerns about neutrality or tone, they should be addressed through content improvement, not removal. The topic's notability is well-established. Hossain Muhammad (talk) 06:13, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: User Hossain Muhammad and user MahdiRiyad are the same user and blocked for sock puppetry.[46] He tried to manipulate this AfD with his sock account. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 22:21, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:02, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Randy Cooper (Model maker)

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

Fails WP:GNG no significant coverage, beyond listings and credits. Declined 5 times at WP:AFC but moved to mainspace repeatedly by User:Orlando Davis who states “ I don't agree with notability tags. The subject may take it personally. Deletion makes more sense, or leave it alone.” so here we are. Theroadislong (talk) 15:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Film, and Visual arts. Theroadislong (talk) 15:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Fine-Scale Modeler, The Evening Independent, and Bay News 9 are all highly reliable and independent. The film credits and interview articles should be noted. Significant changes have been made after each time it was turned down. Orlando Davis (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With niche sourcing like Fine-Scale Modeler, one good way to establish it as a RS is to show where the source is seen as a RS by other RS, particularly academic/scholarly sources. Offhand I see it used listed in a further reading section in this CRC Press book and a note in this Taylor & Francis. I wasn't able to find much more. The magazine was owned by Kalmbach Media but was sold to Firecrown Media last year. It looks like this is probably usable, but I'd recommend running it through WP:RS/N to be certain.

As far as interviews go, those are seen as primary sources regardless of where they're posted unless they're written in prose. The standard interview format is pretty much just question and answer, without any sort of accompanying article. As such, they almost always have little to no editorial oversight or fact-checking beyond formatting and spell-check. This is a very widely held stance on Wikipedia and is unlikely to ever change.

Now, when it comes to film credits the issue here is that notability is WP:NOTINHERITED by the person working on a notable production or with notable people. The reason for this is that there can be hundreds to even thousands of people working on a film. According to this, over 3,000 people worked on Iron Man 3, so just working on a notable film isn't enough to establish notability - you need coverage in independent and reliable sources that specific highlight the person in question. So if there was a RS review that stated "Randy Cooper's work on IM2 was fantastic", that would count. However with his work being so specific, it's unlikely that he would be highlighted over say, the person or company who was overall in charge of VFX.

Finally, I guess I'd be remiss if I didn't say that local coverage tends to be kind of seen as routine on Wikipedia as local outlets are more likely to cover a local person. So in this case what you will need to do is help establish how this coverage should be seen as more than just local, routine coverage. Viewership/circulation numbers are a great way of doing this. So for example, a local paper with a fairly low readership would be seen as kind of routine whereas say, an article in a major, well circulated paper would be seen as a much stronger source. Now to be fair, there's nothing official saying that local coverage can't be used, but it is typically seen as a weaker source and shouldn't be doing the heavy lifting in an AfD discussion. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response.

Bay News has a very high viewership (1.76 Million), (source 11). Charter Communications

The Evening Independent was a major newspaper in the Tampa Bay area and was merged as the Tampa Bay Times in 1986, which has a circulation of over 100k not including the more widely read digital edition. 1)Times Publishing Company 2) Tampa Bay Times Orlando Davis (talk) 19:54, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fine Scale Modeler magazine is ok for sourcing, the rest either aren't online, trivial mentions or primary sources. I can't pull anything up. Just not enough sourcing for wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 19:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We have two solid sources so far: Fine Scale Modeler and the Evening Independent. Also, we should be able to use the five interviews due to the Ignore-all-rules rule since it is an article that is obviously notable, and the rules are getting in the way. Interviews by the hobby magazines Sci-Fi-Modeler., Psycho Moya Styrene, the YouTube channels Richard Cleveland (Amazing Plastic), Adam Savage’s Tested (A YouTube channel with almost 7 million subscribers and the public television Bay news, with a viewership of 1.76 million make Randy notable, and the Ignore All Rules rule was put in place for situations like this when the rules get in the way of an obviously notable article. He built many models that were used for major films such as Starship Troopers, Iron Man 2, Stargate, Spider-Man 2, and many others. Just looking at his older models, it's obvious that the style of spaceships he created was used for Starship Troopers, a major movie!

And what's the difference between an interview and an article in this case? For this article, the part that matters for notability is that he is significant enough to be written about and interviewed by various significant sources. Orlando Davis (talk) 11:26, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Orlando Davis and the extent of the sources. Meets GNG and highlights the career of one of the notable science fiction model designers. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:11, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Avner Netanyahu

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

There's a lot of coverage of him because he's the son of a public figure. Supporting your relative's political career does not make you a public figure. He's not involved in politics himself or done anything to establish WP:NBIO. WP:INVALIDBIO. Longhornsg (talk) 18:23, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Israel. Longhornsg (talk) 18:23, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Coverage is rather routine, he went to school, military and he got married... Perhaps competing on the TV show would make him notable, but there isn't much coverage about that either. I don't see notability being met. Oaktree b (talk) 19:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:BLP and WP:NOTINHERITED violations galore. Many more (75%?) lines of text are devoted to his family, fights, arguments, phone hacks, breakups, and security details - than anything he's ever done. Where's the assertion of notability? Also, the photo of him as a kid is problematic. Ping me if you can fix this. I'm a fan of Israel, FWIW. Bearian (talk) 17:20, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Avner Netanyahu himself requested that the article about him be deleted from the Hebrew Wikipedia on 8 Arpil 2024. The article remained. There were editors who admire Benjamin Netanyahu, who supported the deletion. There was a biased vote. The article was deleted and then restored because it was discovered that there was a problem with the vote with editors who specifically registered to vote. See here. It is strange that even the English Wikipedia wants to delete an article about a person in whom there is a lot of interest. Avner Netanyahu is going to get married on June 16, 2025, in Ronit farm a very expensive place with 2,000 very wealthy guests. This is causing a lot of anger in Israel, and there are going to be many demonstrations near the wedding venue, including blocking the narrow road to the wedding venue. And here they suddenly think it has no encyclopedic importance. See Articles 1. חתונת המ(ח)אה: ההכנות לחתונה של אבנר נתניהו קיבלו תפנית מפתיעה - ואיש לא נשאר אדיש. 2. התכנון למחאה בחתונת בנו של רה"מ - והביקורת בשמאל: "מטומטם וחסר תועלת, כך מתכננים בשמאל "להחריב" את חתונתו של אבנר נתניהו, 3. חתונת בנו של נתניהו בסכנה? אלו הפעולות הצפויות באירוע Hanay (talk) 13:04, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the article about him? Avner Netanyahu is less involved than his brother Yair, but he is definitely involved. He said of his father, Benjamin Netanyahu, that he is a great leader like Winston Churchill. and more. Hanay (talk) 13:09, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Avner Netanyahu may have been in the background in the past but his upcoming wedding is now of major interest. People will want to know who is Avner Netanyahu. His wedding is a slap in the face to the thousands of hostages, injured, dead, and their families. The lavish and ostentatious event for some 2000 guests is occurring while hostages, soldiers, and Gazans are being killed as a result of the policy of Avner's father, Benjamin Netanyahu. While some claim Avner shouldn't pay the price of his parents' perfidy, one of the leaders of the protests, who worked as security guard for the Netanyahu family so knows them well, appealed to Avner to wed in a modest ceremony. Ami Dror posted this notice: "Avner, Advice from someone who knew you as a cute little boy...Have a modest wedding,...as if the 58 kidnapped people were your brothers, and not as if they were a story that doesn't concern you. Go to the media and talk about it. I promise you we won't come. Stay at Ronit Farm, say there will be 200 guests, a reasonable number. No asado, no caviar, and no champagne waterfalls...Avner, A modest wedding - I promise you won't see us. A Ceausescu-style banquet - we'll do everything we can to have you dance to the Gaza horror film while pictures of the hostages fly above you tied to yellow balloons." Activists are reportedly organizing motorcades to disrupt guest arrivals and plan to distribute copies of the book Mr. Abandonment and magnets bearing images of hostages. “We’re not trying to ruin the wedding,” protest leader Ami Dror told Ynet. “We couldn’t if we wanted to.” He explained that the protest isn’t about the marriage itself, but what the celebration symbolizes—especially after 21 months of war, during which many soldiers have held modest, makeshift weddings in between reserve duties. “It’s about the disconnection and arrogance. While reservists got married on wooden crates, he’s hosting a grand event at the country’s most luxurious venue.” MK Naama Lazimi of the "Democrats" party, headed by Yair Golan: “The problem isn’t the wedding itself,” she added, “but the complete tone-deafness. While the public grieves, struggles, and goes sleepless, the prime minister’s family puts on a lavish spectacle. It’s a show of detachment from the people.” Who is Amit Yardeni? Meet the woman marrying into Israel’s most-watched family — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loves coffee (talk • contribs) 10:46, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By having this extravagant wedding while so many people are suffering, Avner has made himself a public figure. Loves coffee (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: @Hanay, it is interesting to learn about the subject's deletion request at hewiki, but as I understand it he has made no such request here, so it likely does not impact this discussion. The English Wikipedia has its own standards for notability, which are fairly high. Please do not be surprised that an article kept elsewhere might be deleted here. More importantly, I understand that the discussion at hewiki was troubled, but the way you have worded your comment, it sounds like you are accusing Oaktree b and Bearian, two highly-experienced editors, of being connected to the issues there. This is casting aspersions and not allowed; I encourage you to strike the sentences beginning "It is strange..." and "And here they..." Toadspike [Talk] 23:30, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED. Even with the sources from Hanay, it seems the subject would be considered WP:BLP1E at best.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Avner receives regular coverage, not all of which dervives from his family name, From the recent wedding saga to the very debate on his article deletion on hewiki (1, 2), to his victory in the bible quiz, enlistment and so on. I haven't looked into it too deeply, but this seens to constitute repeated coverage from noteworthy sources (haaretz, ynet, N12) that centers on Avner himself. Totalstgamer (talk) 19:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Le Soleil de la Floride

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

After 10 years this article still does not indicate how it is notable per WP:GNG. Google search does not bring up significant discussion of it anywhere, only directories and social media. ... discospinster _talk 21:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, United States of America, and Florida. ... discospinster _talk 21:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable. No SIGCOV in RS. I couldn't find any RS about it, only business databases, connection with other business and social media. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 22:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This newspaper is still very much read and distributed throughout South Florida. It is considered a staple in french-speaking households in Florida. Florekayl (talk) 19:05, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you could provide multiple independent, reliable sources about this, it would help with the decision. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 21:22, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, all its competitors have a Wikipedia page too. Florekayl (talk) 19:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What competitors are these? ... discospinster _talk 22:59, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of French-language newspapers published in the United States, where it has an (unsourced) entry. This newspaper seems fairly proud of itself [47], and its existence is certainly interesting, but I haven't found any independent sources to justify notability. Toadspike [Talk] 23:06, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vineeta Rastogi

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

Declined prod. For an American person, a complete lack of coverage, only 1 hit in google news, fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 23:35, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Health and fitness, United States of America, and Maryland. LibStar (talk) 23:35, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Neither she nor her organization, the Vineeta Foundation , is notable. Fails WP:GNG. AndySailz (talk) 11:48, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we are not a memorial service. Many of my peers and contemporaries died of AIDS and don't have Wikipedia "pages". Bearian (talk) 17:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom - don't see much coverage - fails WP:BASIC Asteramellus (talk) 22:59, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With a 3 column obituary in the Washington Post (republished in papers in Kentucky, Missouri, Iowa and Florida), and an article 15 years after her death in Hyphen (magazine) (currently an External Link, but should be a reference), that is easily enough for WP:BIO. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:12, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per multiple reliable sources identified by RebeccaGreen. ~Kvng (talk) 13:24, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per RebeccaGreen and multiple significant coverage cited in the article. See this [48], [49]. CresiaBilli (talk) 05:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: fails WP:GNG. The article in the Washington Post is the only one with WP:SIGCOV, but it is an opinion piece. The subject seems non-notable, unfortunately.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kennedy Ekezie

AfDs for this article:

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

This entrepreneur's article was deleted after an AfD discussion in April 2023 (and this 2020 AfD discussion and this 2018 MfD discussion). It was nominated on the basis of lacking reliable/independent sources, but was re-published later that year. I don't see any improvement in available reliable sources on the article subject (e.g., sources published since the last deletion). The article for his company, Kippa, also seems lacking in sourcing and possibly doesn't meet WP:NCORP, so I'm not sure a merge/redirect would be too useful in this situation. Best, Bridget (talk) 21:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Bridget (talk) 21:49, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Finance, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - a made up in one day awards for up and coming but run of the mill business person. We are a charity. not LinkedIn. Protect against re-creation yet again. Bearian (talk) 17:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am wholly leaning keep on this. Queen's Young Leader Award and Future Awards Africa definitely meets ANYBIO. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 13:06, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Ekezie is notable, he passes general Wikipedia guidelines, having received significant coverage from reliable sources and has won the Queen's Young Leader Award. He has also been recognized by Forbes 30 under 30 in the finance category. He is also the recipient of the The Future Awards Africa (2022), which is very notable in Africa. Send down the rain (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:02, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:55, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Notability has changed since I voted to delete in 2020. While Forbes 30 under 30 at this point is a junk measure of significance, we have profiles in the Independent Nigeria (2022?), Face2Face Africa (2022), Nigeria Tribune (2018), BBC (2019), and an article in The Nation about receipt of the Future Awards Africa (2022). That, + receipt of Queen's Young Leader Award satisfies me that GNG is met. I really don't think the high bar of ANYBIO is met by those two awards, but it doesn't need to be. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Bowers

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

Regional-level NASCAR driver with no championship wins. Fails to meet WP:NMOTORSPORT or WP:WikiProject NASCAR/Standards. Citations are database entries and an obit. Nothing better found on search. — Moriwen (talk) 19:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Idaho. — Moriwen (talk) 19:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Idaho Statesman wrote a great deal of stories about him. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:58, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are pages on hundreds of "regional drivers", the page could use more sources but shouldn't be deleted. ThunderC12 (talk) 23:48, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't think this is the same person [50], that's about all for sourcing... I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:18, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thoughts on what BeanieFan11 linked above? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 00:31, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No sources have been presented yet - just a search tally. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:03, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep coverage of driver through BeanieFan11's link seems to show sigcov. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 01:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Am I seeing the same as you? All I see is that the keywords Jerry + Bowers yield 10,707 matches when restricted to Idaho newspapers. The same keywords, incidentally, yield 1,860,588 hits across the whole collection, of which 12,678 are in England. Unsurprising since there are many people named Bowers who will be mentioned in articles also mentioning people named Jerry in English language newspapers, but why would we think any of those are about this person? If all we have is a search tally then we have no sources yet. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:10, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you're logged in to Newspapers.com, it shows "best match" articles. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 12:20, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so which of these are not just news reports but secondary sources? And all I see when doing that, is the Idaho Statemsan, which would count as one source if any of these are secondary. Again, we need to go on more than a search results list. Could we find a few sources showing more than one newspaper, and more than straight news reports? Thanks.
ETA: This link will allow access to the search list and the related articles through the Wikipedia Library: [51] Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Some sources: 1 2 3A 3B Some others that aren't as good 4 5 6 Obit: 7 ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 14:33, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for these. The first of these significantly covers him, in an article occasioned by his climb towards a national NASCAR circuit placement. By the third article, written 2 years later, his dreams, it seems, have become a reality. Now these are all in one paper, the Idaho Statesman, and primarily written by the same correspondent: Ray Giffin. The Idaho Statesman is the daily newspaper of Boise, Idaho. We are told he went to school in Meridian Idaho, which is an adjacent conurbation to Boise, so the greater Boise area. This is local interest coverage, although it is significant.
GNG requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable and secondary sources. Multiple articles in a single source like this will count as a single source for GNG. This is especially relevant when the source is of a local nature. So - is there anything else? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak delete: searching on Newspaper Archive via WFL I found a number of articles in Nampa Idaho Free Press that mention him in conjunction with other drivers in races but I didn't see any that were in-depth about him specifically. The only non-Idahoian source I was able to find that mentions the same Jerry Bowers (there are so many Jerries) was a table of race results in Washington. I think it is consensus that he doesn't meet either of the driver specific notabilities and I would agree with Sirfurboy that GNG isn't met in this case either. Moritoriko (talk) 01:37, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist - any coverage outside of the Statesman?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak delete - per my comment above. Just registering it as a !vote for the record. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Journalism in Nagpur

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

Per WP:NOPAGE, there is nothing in this article which shows why the subject needs an article. Capitals00 (talk) 05:39, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Maharashtra. Shellwood (talk) 09:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge a bit to Nagpur#Media (the bits about the first newspapers). As for the rest, there's nothing remarkable about journalism in this particular city, so no article is warranted. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:38, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Age of Debt Bubbles

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

WP:NFRINGE. Heterodox economic thinktanks are not reliable sources for the theories they promote, and result in utter nonsense contrary to policy when they are the only sources available. Statements made in wikivoice in this article do not meet the standards of evidence required for wikivoice, and, again, the lack of other sources would make it difficult to assess WP:PARITY. Even if useful sources are found, which I have not been able to, I would suggest it might be better to start afresh without relying on content presumably written based on said fringe sources. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Libertarianism, and Economics. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Roofing Contractors Association

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

Declined prod that was redirected to Reid Ribble. Ribble was only president for 2 years and his article contains no information on what this association is/did. Article created by a single purpose account.

A search in google news only comes up with roofing related sources which are not independent for meeting WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 04:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, and United States of America. LibStar (talk) 04:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Coen

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

Another Vintagekits hagiography of an individual who lacks WP:SIGCOV. This was a man at the lower end of the IRA food chain whose only claim to fame is getting killed by an undercover soldier in a shoot-out.

Sourcing of the article is poor, and although Coen is described in some quality publications, these are almost all passing mentions of the circumstances of his death. Leonstojka (talk) 04:02, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Terrorism, United Kingdom, and Northern Ireland. Leonstojka (talk) 04:02, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Secondary Ticket Agents

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

Declined prod that was redirected to Financial Services Authority. I don't believe it should be redirected to an article which doesn't even refer to it. This article was created by a single purpose editor and unreferenced since 2008. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 03:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 03:58, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 03:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Business. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Francisco Rueda (footballer)

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

Mexican footballer who played a few games for CF Monterrey and then went on to play in the minor leagues in the US. Lacks of WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 02:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Sportspeople, Mexico, and Georgia (U.S. state). Svartner (talk) 02:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 09:17, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails GNG. RossEvans19 (talk) 14:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The North Africa Post

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

There just doesn't seem to be any substantial third party coverage of the North Africa Post.

A regular google search on "The North Africa Post" gets only 23 hits. It gets around the same hits on Google Books as a source. 233 hits on google scholar, but none with it in the title, I'm guessing as a news source. (I know of very obscure journals that get more hits than that.)
Searches to find conversation about it such as "of the North Africa Post" (1); "in the North Africa Post (0); "The North Africa Post has" (4 not from the website itself) "The North Africa Post is" (15 included wiki and mirrors) suggest it isn't being talked about. OsFish (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Morocco. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rory Gonsalves

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

Olympian with a lack of WP:SIGCOV. I suggest a redirect to Antigua and Barbuda at the 1996 Summer Olympics. Svartner (talk) 02:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics, Sportspeople, Cycling, and Antigua and Barbuda. Svartner (talk) 02:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Antigua and Barbuda at the 1996 Summer Olympics: All I could find here were some passing mentions such as [[52]], assuming that is even the same person. As such, there isn't enough WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:SPORTSCRIT here. Let'srun (talk) 09:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Let'srun. RossEvans19 (talk) 14:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andrii Kobchyk

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

Declined prod suggesting sources may exist for name in Cyrillic "Андрій Кобчик". Google news comes up with 2 sources but they are mere 1 line small mentions. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NGYMNAST. LibStar (talk) 01:51, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 02:00, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 02:01, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 02:59, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Not my job to look into this, but I'm the one who de-prodded. Seems to be quite a few hits online, hence the de-prod. Apologies in advance to those either unwilling or unable to source information in a non-English language. It's probably why Wikipedia has the biases that it does. In any case, in my extremely limited abilities, it took this American about 30 seconds to find this, which appears to be a short feature from a Ukrainian news outlet, with smaller routine coverage to supplement here, here, and here. Here's another Ukrainian news mention with a similar/identical(?) story here. Additional mentions here, here, here, here, here, etc. He's not going to have a whole 50-set encyclopedia dedicated to him, most people don't, but if someone took the time to add those references plus whatever else is floating out there, he's probably in the top 90th percentile of sourced material for biographies. GauchoDude (talk) 15:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:54, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leonidas Kormalis

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

Olympian with a lack of WP:SIGCOV. I suggest a redirect to Greece at the 1960 Summer Olympics. Svartner (talk) 02:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics, Sportspeople, Sport of athletics, and Greece. Svartner (talk) 02:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nomination. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per common sense and coverage. He was a multi-time national champion, Balkan champion and Mediterranean Games champion with various medals at other competitions as well. He's still remembered today, decades after his death and over a half-century after his career, as a "legend". Here it is mentioned: "In 39th place [on a list of greatest athletes] is the once great PAO runner, Leonidas Kormalis, who wrote his own history with the "clover". Born in November 1932, he was a particularly fast athlete and one of the best relay runners of all time. His greatest moments with the Club came in the 1950s, when he was crowned Greek champion in the relay and in the 400m, while in 1955 he won the silver medal with the 4X100m team at the Mediterranean Games. His greatest success, however, was in the same event in 1959 when he won the gold medal in the 4X400m with a time of 3.15.0 and the silver medal in the 4X100m with a time of 41.7." He apparently still holds a national record: "About two months later, Leonidas Kormalis further cemented his presence in the sport and the Club as he was a member of the National team that holds the national record in this demanding event at the time. More specifically, in the international races held in Cairo on 28/7/1958, Kormalis ran third along with V. Syllis, K. Moragemos and Spyropoulos, which set the best performance of all time in the country with 1.57.3." There's plenty of other modern brief coverage of his accomplishments, e.g. this ("Leonidas Kormalis: Another huge figure in Panathinaikos athletics was Leonidas Kormalis who wrote his own history in the Club. 1953 was one of the years that stood out and it is characteristic that he emerged as the Balkan gold medalist with the 4X100 and 4X400 teams of the National team. At the same time, in the same year he distinguished himself at the SISM World Championship as he won the silver medal with the 4X400 team and the bronze medal with the 4X100 team.") and this ("On this day in 1957: The feat of the 'trefoil' athlete Leonidas Kormalis in the pentathlon was significant as he emerged as Greek champion and the Club will not forget the moment. The 'green' multi-sport athlete impressed with his performance at the Panathinaikos Stadium and celebrated the title by collecting 2,201 points.") We need to use common sense. Greek newspapers are highly, highly, highly likely to have covered him significantly at the time, as he was an all-time great still considered a "legend" today – we have not searched them. People like this get coverage, and its ridiculous to delete people of such clear notability without checking any of the places where it is virtually certain there is coverage. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:07, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ramon Enrich

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

Another BLP that has been undersourced for 15 years. There are plenty of biographies out there that can provide sources (like this one) but none of them are independent to provide notability. As much as I like his paintings I don't think they are a big enough inspiration on the artistic world to get him a WP:ARTIST pass. I did my best to try searching Spanish but I am open to the possibility I missed something. Moritoriko (talk) 02:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Spain. Moritoriko (talk) 02:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Long Run, Indiana

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

THis was a searching nightmare, but what I did find was a very fulsome historical sketch of the Baptist church, which is located a ways northwest; it makes no mention of a town. An older history of the county likewise has many references to "Long Run", but these are all to the stream of the same name. So right now what we have is the post office. But I get no other indication there was ever a town, and what's there now is pretty ambiguous. Mangoe (talk) 02:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - only a post office. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 16:45, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

E Health Point

AfDs for this article:

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

I looked at the sources identified in last AfD and they are now all dead. Could not find significant coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 02:37, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Organizations, and India. LibStar (talk) 02:37, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for corporations, as explained in WP:ORGCRIT. AndySailz (talk) 23:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails notability, also article is too promotional and lacks notable news references.Almandavi (talk) 07:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep :In the previous AFD, User:Churn and change provided two sources: The World Health Organization , which is peer-reviewed and offers a factual, neutral, and analytical description of eHealthPoint’s services (telemedicine, clean water, diagnostics, medicines)[53]. The MIT Technology Review Review provides detailed, neutral, and factual information about eHealthPoint’s telemedicine model, service structure, and progress, further establishing its credibility[54]. Additionally, I found other sources: IJCMR is a peer-reviewed journal, but its information is primarily based on eHealthPoint’s perspective, lacking third-party verification or critical analysis, making the article somewhat promotional[55]. The Daily Excelsior article is similar to The Economic Times article, as both provide identical information about the eHealthPoint and Max Healthcare partnership (e.g., covering 400 villages in Bathinda, ₹30 per consultation, and expansion plans)[56][57]. The Newswire source mentions the Genpact-NASSCOM award but is otherwise entirely promotional[58]. The HBS case study on eHealthPoint analyzes its business model, challenges, and social impact, offering valuable insights, though its proprietary nature limits publicly available information[59]. Given the two reliable sources (World Health Organization and MIT Technology Review), the page should be retained on Wikipedia. SachinSwami (talk) 11:18, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The WHO article and the MIT review one are small 1 line mentions of E Health point and not SIGCOV and don't count for establishing notability. LibStar (talk) 00:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*::The review of MIT seems to be entirely based on e-Health Point, but is there any mention of another company to negate this? The World Health Organization source only mentions the name of E Health Point, but it’s not clear if it’s fully based on it. Even if we accept that, there are still two reviews. The second is a case study from HBS, which is also a review [60]. Now, tell me whether to support this or not, and I’ll shape my opinion based on what you say. SachinSwami (talk) 02:52, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SachinSwami analysis. CresiaBilli (talk) 06:05, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello CresiabBilli, have you personally checked all the sources? Can you specify which of the sources I provided are reliable and explain how they are appropriate? Please stop immediately supporting "Keep" just because someone else backs it—use your own judgment as well. SachinSwami (talk) 06:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:I am withdrawing my previous comment. All the sources are from 12 years ago, and no recent reviews can be found on Google. Therefore, there are no current sources about the company, so supporting "Keep" does not seem appropriate. SachinSwami (talk) 06:22, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Donna Abbott

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

Non-notable person, article is rife with unsubstantiated claims. Being inducted into the Maryland Women's Hall of Fame seems impressive; however, hundreds of people have been inducted into it. Yuchitown (talk) 01:34, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the Maryland Women's Hall of Fame. Yuchitown (talk) 01:35, 29 May 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 May 29. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:00, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Maryland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:27, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: The subject has recieved a well-known and signficiant honor thus is suitable under WP:ANYBIO thus fullfilling WP:GNG. Contrary to nominator's assertion that the Maryland Women's Hall of Fame includes "hundreds of people", nominataor's claim is incorrect. The institution adds less than five honorees per year since inception in 1985. For 2025, only four women were included, including Abbott. The Maryland Women's Hall of Fame honors Maryland women who have "made unique and lasting contributions to the economic, political, cultural, and social life of the state and to provide visible models of achievement for tomorrow's female leaders" and all fullfill WP:GNG.

Yuchitown, can you please give specific examples of your contention that the "article is rife with unsubstantiated claims"? All sources used and cited in the article are from reliable sources independent of the subject -- daily newspapers, magazines and otherwise.

It appears the objection by the nominator stems from the fact that this woman's "tribal affiliation" is self-identified (given Yuchitown's editing of the article). This is irrelevant for the notability discussion - as the individual fulfills WP:ANYBIO and there are reliable and independent sources substantiating them with coverage. Nayyn (talk) 11:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honest question: does every woman who ever been inducted into a state women's hall of fame qualify as notable? Is inclusion a "well-known and significant honor"? That is her primary claim to fame. Her organization is not even state-recognized as a tribe by Maryland, so that doesn't contribution. The organization itself would have a difficult time establishing notability in Wikipedia, so being the first woman lead of it wouldn't automatically be considered notable. Yuchitown (talk) 14:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Following up, is every every woman who ever been inducted into a state women's hall of fame qualify as notable? Is inclusion a "well-known and significant honor"? Yuchitown (talk) 21:02, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Her inclusion in the Hall of Fame is not because of her role in the organization. It is in recognition of her work to share tribal history of the Eastern Shore in schools and promote it in the community. As well as her work on environmental issues. There are plenty of other Self Identified tribes on Wikipedia so I don't understand your justification of why it would not be notable enough for the encyclopedia.

Maryland did not have a process for formally recognizing tribes until 2012. The state identified and serves this "Tribe" in the Department of Indian Affairs and has done so since the 1980s. You will understand that because of the history of the US many native peoples of the Eastern shore have not been able to maintain continuity in the ways that Western tribes have done so. The reason why they are not "formally recognized" is due to the lack of continuity. But the state does recognize them and they are included as with other self identified tribes in legislation and elsewhere.

And yes, inclusion in a state women's hall of fame does qualify as notable under WP:GNG as it is a specific and rather limited honor. Nayyn (talk) 22:33, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability for Donna Abbott hinges on *her* actions and significant individual recognition in published sources. Not every leader of every organization is automatically notable. Any Wikipedia policy affirming that inclusion in a state women's hall of fame automatically qualifying an individual would be helpful. Yuchitown (talk) 17:15, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Separare comment, since this is a separate conversation: The notability of Nause-Waiwash Band of Indians could take place if that article were created. It's OR to state that the Nause-Waiwash Band of Indians is a "tribe." Organizations that self-identify as Native American tribes run the gamut from large organizations with long histories and notability established from their activities being written about extensively in books and the press to organizations that barely have any published mentions at all; so some are notable as organizations; others not. I'm fairly well-versed on Indigenous peoples of the Northeastern Woodlands and their histories, including coastal tribes. The Maryland Commission on Indian Affairs is comprised on people from unrecognized organizations and works with these organizations but that is not the same as state-recognition. Maryland is clear about who their three state-recognized tribes are. Yuchitown (talk) 17:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Abbott meets WP:GNG with broad coverage in the news and recognition at the state-wide level in Maryland. There are reliable sources supporting aspects of her work as chief, though I note that the article could use some tidying up (but that is *not* a criteria for deletion).DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:51, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't want to wade into this too much, but being the "Chief" of a non-recognized native tribe/band doesn't seem notable. Native American sovereignty is important, but only having that a reason for your article here seems non-notable. There isn't a ton of sourcing anyway, so nothing helpful Oaktree b (talk) 23:02, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's described as a non-profit/charity as well, so this person is the "boss" of a barely recognized non-profit group... You'll need a ton of sourcing to show notability, I don't see that. Oaktree b (talk) 12:01, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment-- your "delete" is wading into the conversation. An important distinction-- Abbott is not "notable" for being the chief. She is notable for the work that she has done in the community towards raising awareness of the tribal history of Maryland's Eastern Shore tribes that has been largely lost, and for her environmental advocacy. This is why she was awarded the Maryland Women's Hall of Fame honor. So your argument that "being the "Chief" of a non-recognized native tribe/band doesn't seem notable" doesn't really apply here. Nayyn (talk) 19:51, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:14, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - A few years ago, WikiProject Women in Red did a "Halls of Fame" editing drive to turn redlinks blue of women in Halls of Fame. The guidelines there stated that entries listed of women without articles may well not be suitable as the basis for an article. All new articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability criteria with reliable independent sources. I think it may be useful to this discussion to analyze the sources per WP:POL, the guideline for notable politicians, which states that there needs to be significant press coverage for major local political figures (she is not a state political figure, but a local figure), and it does not seem that she is a "major" figure either. Netherzone (talk) 15:09, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

William Fleming (Irish republican)

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

Similar to my nomination for Charles Breslin, this is another IRA biography of someone who seems to only attract coverage for his death in a particular incident involving undercover soldiers. The description and debate surrounding the manner of his killing could easily be reflected in other articles. Leonstojka (talk) 02:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Terrorism, United Kingdom, and Northern Ireland. Leonstojka (talk) 02:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Randy Degg

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

A completely unsourced BLP since 2010. this and this are the only two mentions I can find of him on the internet and zero hits in the newspapers which surprised me. Unfortunately those hits are not indepth and they don't support almost any of the facts here. Moritoriko (talk) 02:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, and Michigan. Moritoriko (talk) 02:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He was covered significantly in the Bay City Times, e.g. here, here (p2) and here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:15, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why the heck did none of this come up when I searched his name? 1st one is a little interesting, 2nd one is high school, 3rd one is not significant and they are all what I would consider local mentions. Can you find anything better because I still think its delete. Moritoriko (talk) 03:50, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added some references that were suggested here. It would be interesting to see whether he has done anything notable since the end of his playing days. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:14, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rainbow Voices Community Center

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

Fails WP:NONPROFIT. Cannot see enough coverage in multiple reliable sources. Capitals00 (talk) 02:02, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Sexuality and gender, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Computaris

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

Non-notable company that doesn't meet WP:NCORP. Spattering of news items were about its acquisition, and nothing else of any lasting importance. ZimZalaBim ^talk 02:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Software, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - there's also a COI issue, many of the edits were made by the company itself. Which is blatant advertising. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 16:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stacy Christakakis

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

Non-notable "technical director" for a sports team. No WP:SIGCOV to indicate notability. ZimZalaBim ^talk 01:58, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:BIO more broadly. No inherent notability in the positions he has held. LibStar (talk) 04:31, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 09:17, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. Halley ^{luv Filipino ❤} (Talk) 09:54, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 16:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Lindsey

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

Fails WP:NBIO; some promotional content. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Television, Indiana, and Kentucky. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and Science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:38, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Holafly

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

This appears to be a basic summary of a non-notable commercial operation - no assertion of notability is made, and the service it provides is routine / non-innovative. A mention in a list of eSIM operators would seem sufficient. SeoR (talk) 00:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. SeoR (talk) 00:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and Ireland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Spain. MarioGom (talk) 19:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:38, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:PRODUCT. An in-depth review in TechRadar - [61] - in-depth coverage in Levante-EMV - [62] - and La Vanguardia - [63] - is enough to pass WP:GNG threshold as well. 82.117.28.137 (talk) 17:47, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Except the article is about the company so WP:PRODUCT doesn't apply. That said - if the article was changed to focus on the eSim service, those reviews would count towards establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 21:25, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can only find product reviews for the eSIMs. Sure it technically qualifies under WP:PRODUCT, but I could not find a single source that describes anything about the company or history of the product, so there isn't really any way to make an sourced article that is not an WP:PROMO. Jumpytoo Talk 08:14, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there's definitely reviews about the eSIM to meet PRODUCT. Sure, maybe the article should be refactored to focus on that aspect, but the distinction seems, to me, somewhat pedantic and I don't think deletion is preferable to redirection here. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:40, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Raj Iyer

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

Non-notable businessman. Autobiographical, promotional page akin to a LinkedIn profile, which Wikipedia is not. Undeclared WP:COI. Fails WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 01:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Military, Tamil Nadu, Michigan, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:29, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabrils: Please provide an explanation for what is "Not suitable" as noted in your message so I can revise the page to comply with the rules. Please do not delete the page without giving me an opportunity to correct the page. Thanks. RajGIyer (talk) 00:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My comment includes links to specific issues: WP:NOT; WP:COI; WP:ANYBIO. Please peruse these links as they make the issues with the page self-evident.

Further, as you may know, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. On my reading, the page does not meet these requirements.

The image used likely breaches copyright, which Wikipedia takes seriously, so should be removed unless clear evidence of its legal use is provided. You uploaded it and claimed it as your "Own work", therefore you claim that you took the photograph and so you clearly know the subject and have a conflict of interest that must be declared (see details below). If you did NOT take the photo, then you have uploaded it on false pretenses. Which of these 2 options is it?

Many of the references would appear to be from sources that are NOT considered reliable for establishing notability.

Additionally, the page tends to read too much like a promotional CV, which Wikipedia is not; and contains prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see WP:PEACOCK).

You almost certainly have a connection to the subject, including possibly being the subject (see WP:AUTOBIO) or being paid, thus you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link).

It would also be helpful in this deletion discussion if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:ANYBIO criteria #3, because XXXXX"). Cabrils (talk) 00:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:30, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Cabrils analysis. CresiaBilli (talk) 06:20, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bolanle Arokoyo

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

Non-notable Nigerian academic. Page seems very likely created by paid account (note image of subject is claimed to be "own work" of author, so at minimum there is an undeclared WP:COI. No evidence that subject meets WP:NPROF or WP:AUTHOR. At best subject is WP:ROTM lecturer. Cabrils (talk) 01:00, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non notable scholar, non notable professor, fails WP:PROF, fails WP:ANYBIO, fails WP:SIGCOV, no valid independent secondary source, majority are source from the education institution that only verifies she’s a staff/professor. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 02:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She was promoted to full professor in 2023, though I note that detail was not listed in the article as it existed when nominated. DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DaffodilOcean, I still stand my ground on my delete vote, she might be a professor but she isn’t notable enough to be included on Wikipedia, still

fails WP:ANYBIO, she doesn’t have independent reliable secondary sources, it’s not just passing mentions, most coverage here aren’t independent of the subject, secondly I support the reason why the nominator nominated this article, maybe in few years she would be qualified. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 17:38, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Language, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:32, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not pass WP:NACADEMIC. Academic citations and H-index level are too low.Goodboyjj (talk) 05:00, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep She is a full professor at the University of Ilorin, the first female to attain the position of professor of linguistics. I have added coverage of her work in English-language sources (Discover Magazine, ref 7 is the best source; Radio Nigeria is another). Given our ability to search out sources in Nigeria, and what has been found, I am inclined to keep this. DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:37, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sekou Ma'at

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

Non-notable social worker. No WP:RSs and would seem none are likely to exist. Fails WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 00:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a quick Google search yields only five results, only three of which actually mention him. The article itself cites very minimal sources, one of which is a primary source. Is written largely like a resume. Element10101 T ~ C 01:54, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:33, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Motlalepula Thabana

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

Declined prod. The 2 non-database sources [64] and [65] are only 1 line mentions of this athlete and insufficient for meeting WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 00:21, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sport of athletics-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 00:48, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 00:50, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 00:51, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 00:52, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Lesotho at the 1980 Summer Olympics: Agree with the nom that the only secondary sources here are not anything more than brief mentions and I don't see anything better elsewhere. Redirect as a WP:ATD with no prejudice against recreation should better coverage eventually be uncovered. Let'srun (talk) 00:12, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Is there any more support for a Redirection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:20, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - Lesotho at the 1980 Summer Olympics - Per Let'srun. Seems like an appropriate ATD, and the reasoning is quite clear that this should not be kept, owing to lack of suitable sources. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:17, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of mass escapes from German POW camps

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

We already have List of prison escapes, List of prisoner-of-war escapes, and German POW camps in WWII, so possibly merge? But no sources, making things confusing and hard to verify (home run?) and has been edited maybe ~50 times in the 15 years since its creation. GoldRomean (talk) 21:39, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Lists, and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 22:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing different from what we already have. Koshuri ^(グ) 10:19, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of prisoner-of-war escapes any entries that can be sourced and don't already exist there or in the linked sublist List of attempts to escape Oflag IV-C. The criterion of 5+ prisoners is arbitrary anyway. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:27, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:18, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as this seems to be a better method of organisation than putting them all in the main article, as the list is rather long. Sources can be added. Element10101 T ~ C 02:03, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Query: What about the arbitrary cutoff of five POWs? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:09, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:20, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Barabız

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

Article is unclear what this is. Seems like a simple (though incomplete) translation of a foreign word, rather than an actual topic. BEFORE is not finding anything by spelling "Barabız" or "Barabus". ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 15:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Russia. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 15:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: I would say it's loosely notable; I found two sources for historic background ([66] and [67]) plus a source for a namesake location in Kazan ([68]). I only checked google, so there can be more info out there. Also I'm not opposed to merge with Kazan. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 17:37, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for finding these. Most are repeats of the same short content and single photo. Also doesn't indicate the "service" went beyond Kazan. I think putting the content into Kazan is a good idea. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 18:36, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Wall (guitarist)

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

Musician from non-notable band. Passing mentions in local press as a part of his band. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Rift (talk) 08:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Michigan. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: With hoping for participation in this discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 12:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No mayor awards, doesn't have a song in national charts, hasn't played a major part in a major role. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think that he meets WP:MUSICBIO because I've found several sources online that cover him and aren't just passing mentions. Sources: [69] [70] [71] [72] Opm581^{(talk | he/him)} 10:41, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately those sources are local and have interviews with the subject of the article. Local sources are not as reliable as national or international ones, and although not necessarily bad, weaker to prove notability. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 19:54, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:11, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Just passing mentions only and didn't found any significant coverage on him. Thus, fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Fade258 (talk) 01:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Shim

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

This is a pretty low-level U Sports and indoor football player. Fails GNG. Couldn't find any sources of substance. Looks like COI editing. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 13:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and American football. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 13:59, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment COI wouldn't shock me either. Based on the author's username and the blurb on their userpage, this sorta smells like a coach trying to get his player some exposure. Though I've been wrong before! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:21, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article is viable and resourceful for others. It was reviewed by Tails Wx. Definitely not the case! I have no relation to any of the articles I have contributed to. I am just a contributor to Wikipedia, as are you. No need for personal attacks, let's just try to fix the legitimate concerns civilly and collectively. I am not even a coach. I am just an arena football, Canadian football fanatic and contributor to Wikipedia. Qb1Coach (talk) 04:25, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Also, please note that I cleaned up the article a little, so what we're looking at now is not how I found it. It falsely had USC Trojans football as a link in the infobox even though he was only a student there. There were also seven unrelated navboxes at the bottom of the article. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you ~WikiOriginal-9~ for cleaning up the article. This is much better!
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Might I suggest we apply the: instead of deletion. There's still a lot of potential for this article to grow in the right manner.The article also has so many links and ties to others that it truly contributes to Wikipedia as a whole. Qb1Coach (talk) 14:36, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Pretty clearly non-notable as only a backup at low-level programs without much in-depth coverage. There's some minor coverage from the Gwinnett Daily Post but there's not enough to satisfy GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:22, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Signed with two Professional IFL teams. First Full-Korean quarterback. Started at South Gwinnett, Ellsworth, and Saint Mary's. Has so many links and ties to other articles. Definitely has more GNG than many other articles. Reliable references from Tulsa Oilers, Gwinnett Daily Post, ESPN, Fox, etc. Over 30 viable references. Qb1Coach (talk) 05:31, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As the reviewer, I'm going to be honest that I should've looked at the coverage more closely when doing so. Now looking at it, you have some coverage here and the Gwinnett Daily Post, but I do agree that it doesn't meet GNG standards nor is significant. All other references are either non-significant coverage/mentions of Shim and player databases. ~ Tails Wx 13:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Posting one reply in reponse to Qb1Coach's various comments: It doesn't help that the three Gwinnett Daily Post articles are paywalled ([73][74][75]). All of those would count as one source anyway. We would need WP:SIGCOV sources from two different newspapers/media outlets that are not connected to Shim. It can be undeleted later if he attracts more coverage. Wikipedia isn't a LinkedIn for college football players. We have to draw the line somewhere. If Shim was notable, the majority of college players could be. He doesn't pass WP:GNG, WP:NCOLLATH, or the old WP:NGRIDIRON (the notability guideline for gridiron football players). He never played in a high level pro league or earned honors in college. I'm personally still skeptical that you don't have some sort of connection to Shim. This has all the hallmarks of WP:COI editing, including tons of random pictures of him on Wikimedia Commons at Category:Joshua Shim by year (even though you didn't upload those). You also wrote "Contributing to the team's success, Shim played a pivotal role in securing their first playoff berth since 2014" which is a plain falsehood because he only had 195 passing yards all season. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no connection to Shim. I just thought this was a unique article opportunity, which it is. "Contributing to the team's success, Shim played a pivotal role in securing their first playoff berth since 2014" I got that information off of the University of Windsor football website. Qb1Coach (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's obviously not true though. He only had 195 passing yards. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 15:29, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand I was just going off of the website's description. Qb1Coach (talk) 15:54, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He did however, have 1,430 passing yards, eight touchdowns, 150 rushing yards, and four rushing touchdowns when he was at Saint Mary's. Qb1Coach (talk) 15:55, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16 Entertainment

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

Its founder Alex Wilhelm is notable, but this company of his has no significant coverage in WP:RS. Hmr (talk) 17:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Companies. Hmr (talk) 17:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. CNMall41 (talk) 04:02, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Nothing notable as sources do not meet WP:ORGCRIT. An WP:ATD could be a redirect to founder but that is assuming he is notable. There are also COI concerns and while those do not bear on the AfD, it would be appropriate to check notability on the founder as opposed to assuming he is. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:04, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. I spit into the wind. Even the nominator agrees the founder is notable, and so there is commonsense need for a bluelink here to direct toward that article. Once again...these do not need to come to AfD. A merge request is the appropriate venue. Chubbles (talk) 04:25, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I, myself, like to live dangerously. lol. I took a close look and not so sure he does although I will not nominate it during this AfD so as not to seem bludgeoning. He has one in-depth piece in Billboard but it is part of 40/40. The rest seems to be mentions or routine coverage. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:17, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think 40/40 disqualifies the piece, other Billboard coverage is also strong. Maybe Alex Wilhelm is on edge of notability, I'm leaning more toward notable. There's reference spam here too - worth a major clean up. Hmr (talk) 18:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your contention and you may be right. I took another look and think I will take to AfD after this is over here. Again, don't want it to come across as disruptive. I basically see him on a bunch of lists but nothing I can find says he would be notable for being on such lists. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Alex Wilhelm - I don't see any worthwhile material in this article that isn't already in the Wilhelm article, so while I would normally suggest a merge, I don't see what it would accomplish in this case. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:10, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Alex Wilhelm - The topic itself unable to meet SIGCOV and unable to demonstrate notability of a company. CresiaBilli (talk) 06:26, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel Asur

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

Language problems may be why I can’t identify sources, but I’ve never before seen an article with entries in multiple language Wikipedias none of which are sourced, and I also note a number of self-published books. Doug Weller talk 18:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article should definitely not have been created directly in mainspace in this condition; it's completely unsourced, and I can't find any third-party sources on Google either. Needs to be either deleted or moved to draft where the creator can work on it. Bishonen | tålk 21:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Doug Weller talk 18:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Spain. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC there is at least one institute for the preservation or recovery of the Asturian language. It may be worth looking there for support. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 11:57, 29 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]
: Academy of the Asturian Language, Asur is a member. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:03, 29 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Keep I have found and added some sources, dating from 1986 to 2025 - easy to find by searching Google Scholar or Google Books. I do not read Spanish (or Asturian), so would need to copy and paste more into Google Translate in order to add more info and refs to the article - but there is certainly scholarly writing about his writing, so he meets WP:AUTHOR. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. Keep All the best: Rich Farmbrough 08:21, 3 June 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files

File:Nz national party coromandel1999 postcard back.gif

Not discussed in article and unnecessary. An image is not required to explain that he has been criticised for vandalism, sabotage, opposition to prisons etc. BLP concerns too admittedly given these are contentious claims. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:05, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't see anything here that can't be represented in text. I find the BLP concerns overwrought though. Buffs (talk) 15:27, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Wokepedia

Wokepedia → Criticism of Wikipedia#Partisanship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 28 § Wokepedia – retarget to Criticism of Wikipedia#Partisanship

"Wokepedia" or "Wokipedia" is not mentioned in the target article. The only thing I know is one of Elon Musk's posts (i.e. tweets) on X [twitter] joking about giving financial compensation if the Wikimedia foundation changes wikipedia to wokepedia (but my statement is completely unsourced and will need searching). Chuterix (talk) 13:53, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably something like this: [76] GoldRomean (talk) 03:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There are secondary sources that mention the "wokepedia" moniker explicitly (e.g. [77][78]) so it would be easy to justify adding a sentence to Views of Elon Musk#Science and technology#Wikipedia and retargeting there. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Views of Elon Musk#Science and technology#Wikipedia, the "wokipedia" tweet is quoted there and "wokepedia" is a reasonable misrembering. Rusalkii (talk) 20:07, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The "properly" spelled Wokipedia also redirects to Criticism_of_Wikipedia#Partisanship, and can be bundled here. Also listed the RfD from last year. Jay 💬 10:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:07, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per Rusalkii. Thryduulf (talk) 18:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Earthen Vessel

Earthen Vessel → Reformed Baptists#Strict Baptists (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The word "Earthen" does not appear anywhere on the target page (let alone the target section) leaving the connection unclear, nor did it appear in the version that was current when the redirect was created in 2010. In 2009 an article at this title about a Christian instrumentalist band (formed that year in Alaska) was correctly speedily deleted under A7, and google results for "Earthen Vessel" band are about a 1970s "Jesus rock" band from the midwest, which suggest that it isn't nonsense but I'm non-the-wiser about what the meaning is. All the uses I've found on Wikipedia are about earthenware, which is what I expected when I saw it in the list of titles (when researching Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 4#Earthen) and I recommend retargetting there (as a {{R avoided double redirect}} of Earthen pot). Thryduulf (talk) 10:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't remember what I was thinking of when I created this, but vaguely remember going through articles for Baptist sects at one time, so I assume that I created it from some text that has since been deleted. I've got no particular background in Baptist history or culture beyond going down a Wikipedia rabbit hole a couple of years ago.

However looking up Google and this is the first hit I get for "Earthern Vessel" Baptist

https://www.baptists.net/history/category/strict-baptist-magazines/earthen-vessel/

JASpencer (talk) 13:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Performative feminism

Performative feminism → Performative activism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I initially thought Mainstream feminism was a good target, but it's a redirect. It's often used to refer to White feminism or Imperial feminism instead too. Is the current target any better? Vivb1 (talk) 19:07, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:14, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Any type of feminism could be performative, depending on the context. I wouldn't retarget to any of those places. The current target is more germane. But while it does mention a protest that could be characterized as feminist, it doesn't use the term, leading to the danger that a reader searching the term could be looking for more specific information than we could deliver. If we can't at least fit in a mention of feminism there, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to deletion. --BDD (talk) 18:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CTGP Revolution

CTGP Revolution → Wiimmfi#CTGP Revolution (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Section at target is deleted (none of the sources were reliable and independent, just fansites), brand new redirect to brand new target serves no purpose. Fram (talk) 09:46, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a load off

Taking a load off → Wiktionary (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete this soft redirect. There are no internal links, and very little information in the wiktionary. So this seems to be a kind of bypass. Викидим (talk) 09:29, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget: Looking at its history, it's a REALLY old redirect to defecation that recently got changed to a soft redirect instead. So, retarget to defecation since no one objected to it in like a decade. Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 10:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Random (inflections of, no less) idiomatic expressions shouldn't have Wikt redirects. Moreover, what the hell? It means to relax or sit down. The very old redirect was probably just vandalism. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:28, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or {{wiktionary redirect}} If I'm going to be honest, I think "Taking a load off" should just use be a {{wiktionary redirect}} template. Wiktionary has a page, but Wikipedia isn't the place for words or phrases. Delete also seems okay. SeaDragon1 (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coffe

Coffe → Jean-Pierre Coffe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Is this more a misspelling of coffee, or a last name? Stumbling9655 (talk) 08:45, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Coffee as a plausible misspelling. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Coffee and add a hatnote there linking to Jean-Pierre Coffe. I am bad at usernames (talk | contribs) 16:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

K.u:K. Armee

K.u:K. Armee → Common Army (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

While commonly called the "k.u.k Armee" I believe this format, with the ":", is a typo, as even the edit summary creating it says "K.u.K Armee", and if not is very unlikely. I'd R3 it but it's too old for that. Rusalkii (talk) 22:46, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed a typo - it should be visible in the edit history. If this article needs to be deleted, then by all means, go ahead. I just figured it could be useful if someone else made the same spelling mistake I did while typing it in ;) CadiaStands42 (talk) 04:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems plausible enough to be useful to me. Note that on German keyboards, . and : are on the same key. -Elmer Clark (talk) 03:40, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sulphur bath

Sulphur bath → Mineral water (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 07:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not related - WP:R#DELETE "The redirect makes no sense" Asteramellus (talk) 01:41, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article did sort of obliquely refer to sulfur baths until this edit by User:Livven. I'm not entirely sure about that edit - a lot of cited material cited to journals and CDC articles was removed as "unnecessary and misleading information" - but I don't think this would have been a very useful redirect even to the old version. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Balneotherapy which is a target better than Mineral spring, target of Sulphur spring. Jay 💬 10:47, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:52, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Safe for drinking water

Safe for drinking water → Drinking water (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The use of the word "for" in this nominated redirect makes it an unlikely redirect in reference to its target. The wording of this redirect makes it seem as though a reader would be looking for a concept such as a container that can be used for safe storage of drinking water, and such information seems to not be in the target article currently. Steel1943 (talk) 07:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is just water that is safe for drinking, i.e. drinking water. Thryduulf (talk) 15:30, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree that the scope of 'for' in a sentence can be ambiguous at times, however, redirecting Safe for drinking water to something like water bottle, which is what seems to have been suggested, seems odd. Personally, I don't think the 'for' is confusing in this case, however, if necessary, I'd prefer that the redirect is removed altogether rather than redirecting to another article. Katiedevi (talk) 15:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As a redirect to drinking water, it's a mistyping of the phrase safe-for-drinking water (with hyphens), which is itself rare. The phrase "safe for drinking water" (with spaces) is more commonly used as an adjective phrase for a property of some pipes or bottles, analogous to food-grade. To the extent that the redirect helps with words-in-title searches intending to find drinking water, a new redirect from water that is safe to drink would be more natural. Jruderman (talk) 23:29, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:52, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infused [Ww]ater

Infused water → Infusion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Infused Water → Drinking water (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These redirects should either have their targets synched or should both be deleted. I have no strong stance either way ... but am defaulting to weak delete if by chance there is no participation since I'm not certain these phrases can describe any specific subject. Steel1943 (talk) 07:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note, Infused water has a WP:BLAR'ed article hiding in its history, potentially a {{R with history}}. Steel1943 (talk) 07:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Most of the Google results for "Infused water" are references to fruit/herb-infused water, which we don't have a page on at the moment. So it would be unhelpful for the vast majority of people familiar with the term "infused water". --Plantman (talk) 07:21, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Infused water wasn't BLARed, it was redirected due to the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infused water in 2017. Pinging the still-active participants @Bon courage, City of Silver, MjolnirPants, Roxy the dog, Bonadea, JzG, and Bearian:. Thryduulf (talk) 15:35, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I can't see the deleted content but as I recall it was complete bollocks and nothing was merged. Guy (help! - typo?) 15:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's still in the history of the redirect, and you are correct, it's bollocks. Just ad-copy language extolling the benefits of drinking it. Nothing useful to merge, really. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping. I recall this, even though my !vote was rather succinct.

The capital W page was created, then moved over a redirect to the lowercase w page. The lowercase w was, at some point, a redirect to Drinking water, so a bot came along and fixed the double redirect by changing the capital W's target to the drinking water article. Later, the lowercase w's redirect was removed and it was written up as an article extolling the virtues of drinking fruit and vegatable-infused water. That's where that prior AfD came into play. That resulted in the lowercase w being blanked and redirected to Infusion.

And now here we are.

I'm going to be bold and change the capital W's redirect target. If this discussion forms a contrary consensus, feel free to revert me and implement it. 16:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...Which I have reverted per the hidden note generated by the {{Rfd}} template that states not to do that. If synching needs to occur, that can be performed at the conclusion of this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:42, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...Yep, that's an AfD. Read through the edit history too quickly. (But ... it is still technically a WP:BLAR since nothing was merged...) Steel1943 (talk) 16:57, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Smerge - as I write years ago, a few sentences are all they need. Bearian (talk) 16:34, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Infused Water to Infusion (aka the current status quo as of MjolnirPants's boldness). Infusion covers infused water, Drinking water does not. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:14, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Desalination membrane

Desalination membrane → Reverse osmosis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in the body of the target article in this specific manner, thus making it unclear why readers would be redirected to the current target article when searching this term. I was originally going to WP:BOLDly retarget this redirect to Membrane distillation, but after reviewing that article, I'm not convinced that that article and the nominated redirect represent the same subject, especially considering that Desalination is a separate article. Steel1943 (talk) 06:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - reverse osmosis relies heavily on membranes, and the section #Desalination does mention membranes quite a bit. While it doesn't outright say "desalination membrane" (except in the references) it does talk about membranes in the context of desalination a lot. --Plantman (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Switching to weak keep, more in favour of retargetting. See below. --Plantman (talk) 07:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I get that, but the same claim could apparently be made regarding membranes for the whole concept of Desalination in general; Reverse osmosis, Membrane distillation, and Desalination all make reference to using "membranes". Steel1943 (talk) 06:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Steel1943 I feel like either Reverse osmosis or Desalination is the best place for this to point to. I'm slightly leaning towards Desalination now, because it provides an overview of all the different uses of membranes in desalination process. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to keeping it as it is (pointing to RO) if there was a consensus to do so. --Plantman (talk) 07:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RO/DI

RO/DI → Reverse osmosis#Aquariums (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Seems to be a WP:XY in the context which it is used. "RO" represents the nominated redirect's target ... but apparently, "DI" stands for Deionization, which is a redirect towards Purified water#Deionization, and thus apparently a separate subject. In addition, in the target article, the current target section and Reverse osmosis#Water and wastewater purification both mention deionization. With all this being said, and the fact this redirect is a mishmash of acronyms, probably best to delete this thing. Steel1943 (talk) 06:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The RO/DI combo is explicitly discussed in that article ("An effective combination of both RO and deionization is popular among reef aquarium keepers...") but not in Purified water#Deionization. And from discussions like [79] and [80], I get the impression that RO/DI water is considered a sort of subcategory of RO water, so even the parts of that section that don't explicitly address it might still be of interest to someone searching "RO/DI." -Elmer Clark (talk) 07:45, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom as first choice, or unrefine as second choice. If aquariums are the context for this redirect, then shouldn't Marine aquarium, which has multiple mentions, be the more appropriate (but surprising) target? Water purification would have been the best, but even there RO and DI are separate sections, and not mentioned together. Jay 💬 05:55, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:49, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miley cryus

Miley cryus → Miley Cyrus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Useless redirect. Swapping the y and the r completely change how you say the word. Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 04:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Perhaps an attempt at a pejorative name. Mdewman6 (talk) 06:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a typo. DrinksOrCoffee_talk^Contribs 08:54, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Mdewman6. Not plausible enough, and likely created as a pejorative name. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Quick internet search returns only earnest typos but no obvious pejorative uses. Brigandeur (talk) 09:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Random typos have no WP:AFFINITY to their target and should be neither created nor kept without some case-specific reason. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:02, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miley yrus

Miley yrus → Miley Cyrus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely misspelling. Missing the first letter of a word makes it less likely then say if it misses the u for example. Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 04:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. We should not have redirects for missing letters of titles with no particular affinity over other missing letters. Mdewman6 (talk) 06:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miley Cyprus

Miley Cyprus → Miley Cyrus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible misspelling. Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 04:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The artist is not a tree. Mdewman6 (talk) 06:56, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, very unlikely misspelling. DrinksOrCoffee_talk^Contribs 08:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Penes

Penes → Penis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not a likely misspelling. Although that's how you say "penis" in Spanish, this is not the Spanish Wikipedia. This could also redirect to somewhere else. Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 04:24, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as it is bolded in the lede as a related term. Mdewman6 (talk) 06:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a standard {{R from plural}}. Thryduulf (talk) 11:43, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Defackating

Defackating → Defecation (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not a very likely misspelling Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 04:10, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mi País, Mi Orguyo

Mi País, Mi Orguyo → Coat of arms of Curaçao (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is the motto on the short-lived winning selection before it was invalidated for copyright reasons, likely too specific to need a redirect, Alexander vee (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep But we discuss that redesign and the associated phrase. I'd keep and refine the target to Coat of arms of Curaçao#Replacement attempt. --BDD (talk) 18:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Gainer

Michael Gainer → Buffalo ReUse (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Bringing this here for discussion as reasonable minds disagree on whether it's an appropriate redirect. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Gainer and User_talk:Star_Mississippi#Just_so_you_know. While I don't think the G4 applied and as such declined it, I am neutral as to the redirect's existence. Star Mississippi 02:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and SALT this is a deliberate attempt to circumvent the consensus decision at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Gainer. Best, GPL93 (talk) 03:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I don't believe it's hurting anything. TheNewMinistry (talk) 03:21, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not a policy-based reason to keep. Best, GPL93 (talk) 03:58, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Currently my mind is split on this. The first thing, G4 would have not suffice since the page's been recreated as a redirect as opposed to the article. I have seen pages of (co)founders being redirected to the respective companies/organizations. Second, I read that AfD multiple times and, while I am getting the impression that it is a first step towards recreating as an article, circumventing the consensus, I do not see a reason not to delete the redirect as per previous precedent, but I unfortunately have to fall into the Weak keep camp in the meanwhile. I might reconsider if strong arguments were brought later. ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prakriti

Prakriti → Prakṛti (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Suggesting to delete this redirect. Prakṛti with IAST in article title should be renamed to the one without IAST (which is this redirect page) as suggested on talk page Talk:Prakṛti similar to Samkhya and Purusha for consistency. Once this page is deleted, Prakṛti can be moved to Prakriti. Asteramellus (talk) 01:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly wrong forum per the nom's last sentence. Sounds like a move request for moving Prakṛti to Prakriti. Steel1943 (talk) 16:54, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I agree with Steel; this looks more of a move request rather than a proposal to delete/retarget a redirect. I suggest withdrawing this in the meantime and follow the instructions at WP:RM to start a move discussion on the subject talk page. ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:43, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules

Template:Dirty Hit

Template:Dirty Hit (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

There is general consensus through previous TfDs that record label navboxes don't provide a close enough association between the artists signed to the label to warrant them. This is a case where categorization (Category:Dirty Hit artists) works better. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Law of Mexico

Template:Law of Mexico (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is a navbox that only contains red links (excluding in the title). It was created in 2013 and since then none of the entries have been created into an article. 6ii9 (talk) 15:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany

Deletion review

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creating articles Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and voting	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates

Speedy deletion candidates

Articles

Files

Categories

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Lists of anti-suffragists

Category:New Testament people named Mary

Template:Amsterdam-stub

Political activists by nationality

Category:12th-century BC Hebrew women

Years in the 19th century in pre-existing Romania

Category:Education in Muzaffarpur district

Category:St. Mary's School, Mumbai alumni

Category:Qatar–The Gambia relations

Category:Morocco–The Gambia relations

Category:Guinea–The Gambia relations

Category:Television shows featuring audio description

Redirects

Wokepedia

Earthen Vessel

Performative feminism

CTGP Revolution

Taking a load off

Coffe

K.u:K. Armee

Sulphur bath

Safe for drinking water

Infused [Ww]ater

Desalination membrane

RO/DI

Miley cryus

Miley yrus

Miley Cyprus

Penes

Defackating

Mi País, Mi Orguyo

Michael Gainer

Prakriti

Templates and Modules

Miscellany

Deletion review