Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

21 November 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< November 20	November 22 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Beverly J. Stoeltje

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

Fails WP:NPROF. No coverage. Been on the cat:nn list for 10+ years and no indication of being notable. scope_creep^Talk 12:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Serie A broadcasters

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability of this topic has not changed since the last AFD 6-7 months ago. It still falls foul of WP:NOTTVGUIDE, and doesn't meet WP:LISTN or WP:GNG. I would support WP:SALTing this to prevent another re-creation. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Lists, and Italy. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of molecules by year of discovery

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

This article is highly inaccurate and misleading as of right now. It is also rather impossible to make a list of molecules by year of discovery, even if it were to be constrained to the 19th century. The contents of the theories of molecules, discovery of aromaticity, etc. is much better described elsewhere. Perhaps should at least be merged into History of molecular theory. Pygos (talk) 11:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Science, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vishnu Teja

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

Sources do not provide significant coverage of the subject; they only offer passing mentions and quotes, quotes are WP:PRIMARY and don’t contribute towards notability. Therefore, the subject fails to meet WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 10:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep: If there is any spamming, we will not reach this page here. If there is any deficiency in the citation, another editor will correct it.

If not, I would suggest moving this page to Draft, if only to give this page a chance to improve.WP:DRAFTIFY WikiMoob (talk) 11:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sexuality and gender, and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warrick Cycles

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

Fails WP:COMPANY. I couldn't find any reliable sources for this English company. (Not to be confused with Warrick Cycles of Springfield, Massachusetts, which is only a little bit less unnotable.) Clarityfiend (talk) 10:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The 2009 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warrick cycles resulted in a dubious keep. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mahesh Kothe

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

The subject has only held non-notable positions, such the mayor and corporator of a small city. A BEFORE search returns results related to election preparations, which are routine and lack significant independent coverage. The article fails to meet WP:GNG as well as WP:POLITICIAN. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 10:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and India. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 10:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This had been mentioned in the original version, which was edited by other contributors.

Premises:

1) The person in question(Mahesh Kothe) was a mayor 2) The Number of IT parks in India and rest of the world are in limited numbers. In India the number stands at 65.(Refer: https://stpi.in/en/about-stpi)

The first IT park in Solapur was brought up by Shri Mahesh Kothe, which is one of those (65 IT parks in India).

The aforementioned fact was mentioned in the original article.

Additional Read: https://www.thebridgechronicle.com/news/maharashtra/solapur-get-it-park-5000-jobs-expected-29124

Thank you Mohit Gandmal (talk) 10:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable position elected politician, fails to meet WP:NPOL, I guess the article is created because of the current Maharasthra legislative elections, the subject fails to meet WP:GNG as no multiple secondary reliable sources providing in-depth coverages. GrabUp - Talk 10:39, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi GrabUP,

Thank you for the comment.

This was anticipated. But the Maharashtra elections have concluded yesterday, that's 20th-Nov-2024. And the article was published post that.

Hence, the given article will have zero impact on the election which has already ended.

Thank you,

Mohit Mohit Gandmal (talk) 10:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The other people who hold the notable position only as mayor & still have a Wikipedia are as follows:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malti_Rai

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priya_Rajan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadwal_Vijayalakshmi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pramila_Pandey

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firhad_Hakim

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinod_Agarwal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junaid_Azim_Mattu

The person is question - Shri Mahesh Kothe, apart from being a mayor has also initiated one of most important project that is Solapur IT park.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Delhi, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Asa Vines

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

Not notable business person. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Texas. Lost in Quebec (talk) 09:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Free Software and Open Source Symposium

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

Fails WP:GNG. No reliable secondary sources covered this event. ThatIPEditor ^{Talk · Contribs} 09:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Software, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq at the 1996 Summer Paralympics

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

Iraq isn't mentioned in [1] which shows the number of participants per country in the 1996 paralympics. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics and Iraq. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Looks like this is a WP:HOAX as it never happened.4meter4 (talk) 09:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 1996 Summer Paralympics as ATD. It's not a hoax, Iraq competed. Quite at what level/to what degree seems unsure, but there are definitely listings of Iraqi athletes on the offical website. The article itself is unreferenced and our coverage is so little/obscure that there's no point keeping an article. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alexandermcnabb, every Iraq match shown there is a DNS (which I assume stands for 'Did not Show'). No team member is shown for any of them. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, MPGuy2824, I meant to mention that. I, too, assume DNS is Did not Show and wondered if there was some other story here (hard to find because the world was invented in 1996, as we all know). But they were certainly supposed to be there - hence my hedge of 'quite at what level/to what degree seems unsure'!!! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
they were certainly supposed to be there Agreed, since matches seem to have been set with their athletes/teams.

Not sure about converting it to a redirect though, since it would be surprising to readers to be taken to a page with no mention. Hopefully, someone else comes up with a better idea. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I added a paragraph to explain reason of no participation of Iraqi delegation with sources added. --Fayçal.09 (talk) 10:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense and fills that tiny lacuna I suspected all along. Not sure whether we're in keep or merge territory here, though. MPGuy2824 ??? Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for adding the sources, Faycal. "Delete" is definitely out of the question now. I'm leaning towards a weak Keep. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Offensive in Podrinje (1993)

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

After removing unreliable local news portals etc, we are left with citations to two pages of the CIA history. I checked them, and all three of the citations failed verification, the only apparent reference to this fighting being a paragraph fragment as follows: "The VRS Drina Corps attacked again late in May and crushed Muslim forces in the salient , driving them back some 15 kilometers to the Praca River and eliminating the threat to Visegrad . Follow - on attacks from Cajnice in the southeast toward Gorazde itself , however , gained little ground . " on page 185. This isn't significant coverage, and therefore doesn't meet WP:N. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Draftify‎. This is a WP:IAR speedy close to meet the needs of the creating editor who has realised their error in moving this to mainspace too early. (non-admin closure) 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eleanna Finokalioti (Eleanna Fin)

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

Disputed draftification. WP:DRAFTOBJECT means this is the next step unless someone chooses to perform WP:HEY. This BLP lacks sufficient references of the quality required in order to reman here. I am not persuaded that Finokalioti passes WP:NACTOR nor WP:NSINGER, nor WP:BIO as presented. This may simply be WP:TOOSOON. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Music, Television, Theatre, Greece, and United States of America. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please write me in simple engish without wiki links if possible what is the problem now?? When I submitted the article I got a notice for IMDb links...so I replace ALL these links with others...What do I have to do now to keep my article on wiki air?? Georgelgreco (talk) 09:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Georgelgreco, That information is on your user talk page. This is really not the venue to write you an instruction manual. This venue is for the discussion of retention or deletion of the article. I, and doubtless others, will discuss this with you thereunto here. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, let me tell you this....Eleanna Finokalioti is a Greek actress, singer and performer who works for 5 years in USA with Artistic O-1B visa. O-1B is for: Individuals with an extraordinary ability in the arts or extraordinary achievement in motion picture or television industry. For 5 years USA country believes that she has the right to stay and work as a performer here...So for USA immigration services she is eligible to stay and present her talent and her work...and for Wikipedia she is not eligible to present her work here?? Sorry this is unfair..... Georgelgreco (talk) 10:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And also she is an Actor's Equity Union member....I have the proof of that and proofs for whatever I say Georgelgreco (talk) 10:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgelgreco In simple English, you created this situation by moving the draft to Mainspace without it being ready to be an article. Awaiting a further review would have been wiser, when all this would have been worked out with you. I have no objection to a consensus based draftification, but it cannot now be done without consensus. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I think I understand what you mean..When I finished with major changes about IMDb links, I had to resend the article for reviewing and not for publishing...BUT I press publish because I read in that page this phrase: If you believe you resolve the problem then press publish... And if you read and check the new links, I replace everything, so I resolved the problem, I think.. Georgelgreco (talk) 10:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgelgreco Then I suggest you create a new line here, and used boldface font for the word "Draftify" and state in ordinary fine "Published by my own error" 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. Published by my own error Georgelgreco (talk) 10:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:NACTOR; WP:NSINGER per nom. Created by SPA. No objection to draftification, but doubt a) more sources are to be found (I didn't find 'em, in any case) and b) whether this won't just get bunged straight back into mainspace. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The creating editor has stated that they published this by their own error, and requested draftification. As proposer I am about to initiate a WP:IAR speedy close to meet the reasonable needs of the creating editor. I am content if editors with greater knowledge than mine choose to revert this action. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Chris Ajemian

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

Non-notable former professional lacrosse player. The closest to WP:SIGCOV I found was a blurb from high school. JTtheOG (talk) 23:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. JTtheOG (talk) 23:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC.4meter4 (talk) 00:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 09:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Speedy delete‎. as a g11. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lagos Oriental Hotel

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

Ref-bombed advert for a non-notable hotel. Nothing to indicate notability. PamD 09:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Travel and tourism, and Nigeria. PamD 09:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nate Bauers

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this former professional lacrosse player. JTtheOG (talk) 23:22, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Connecticut, and Virginia. JTtheOG (talk) 23:22, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC. I found nothing in a WP:BEFORE with WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 00:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 09:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:SPORTCRIT. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Alrich

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this former professional lacrosse player. JTtheOG (talk) 23:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Delaware, and Pennsylvania. JTtheOG (talk) 23:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 09:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purple Francis

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

Procedural nomination per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 13#Purple francis. Article is about a joke character, which was BLARed in 2021 because of a lack of notability. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Games. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Natasha Seatter

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMOTORSPORT as a driver who has competed in low-level domestic and regional motorsport championships with limited to no success. Article reads as a promotional piece – name-dropping circuits raced at, fellow competitors and sponsors – and the user page of the original editor (User:Femaleracedriver) redirects to this article, indicating a WP:COI. Only two sources, one of which is a personal website, and an internet search reveals a lack of SIGCOV. MSportWiki (talk) 22:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Motorsport, Malaysia, and Sportspeople. MSportWiki (talk) 22:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NMOTORSPORT and WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 09:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kassim Nassoro

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:28, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Tanzania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC. None of the sources have in-depth coverage of Nassoro. The article is mostly based on a cricket database which per the 2022 RFC is not considered substantial coverage toward notability.4meter4 (talk) 21:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Tanzania Twenty20 International cricketers as a valid WP:ATD that has been done for numerous other players who've played in minor T20I matches. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ally Kimote

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Tanzania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. None of the sources address the subject directly or in detail other than sports databases which have been deemed not relevant towards proving notability. Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC.4meter4 (talk) 21:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abhik Patwa

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:26, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Tanzania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is no significant coverage in secondary sources for this player. Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC.4meter4 (talk) 21:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV, listings/routine fixtures only. What little MSM coverage there is, is short bios listing teams/fixtures. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rezza Gaznavi

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Singapore. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC Bernie Clay Bear (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV, listings/routine fixtures only. What little MSM coverage there is comprises match stats and short bios listing teams/fixtures. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aritra Dutta

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Singapore. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC Bernie Clay Bear (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV, listings/routine fixtures only. There's a professor Aritra Dutta but this ain't him. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aman Desai

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Singapore. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC Bernie Clay Bear (talk) 00:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV, listings/routine fixtures only, some match stats and short bios listing teams/fixtures. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yasim Murtaza

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV, listings/routine fixtures only. What little MSM coverage there is comprises match stats and short bios listing teams/fixtures. There would appear to be a lot of these very routine players with articles! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adil Mehmood

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Hong Kong. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV, listings/routine fixtures only. What little MSM coverage there is comprises match stats and short bios listing teams/fixtures. This could have been a batch nomination! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Coetzee

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, South Africa, and Hong Kong. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV, listings/routine fixtures only. What little MSM coverage there is comprises match stats and short bios listing teams/fixtures. Probably not the Martin Coetzee at University of Pretoria. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul Majid (cricketer)

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

Fails to meet notability and significant coverage criteria. Shrug02 (talk) 17:16, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, Pakistan, and Bahrain. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV as Abdul Majid, Abdul Majid Abbasi or Abdul Abbasi, all of which he has been known as by various platforms. However, still all listings/routine fixtures/short bios listing teams/fixtures. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talla Ndao

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

Having a career where he played 87 minutes in the Japanese leagues (22 minutes in the first, 22 in the second and 43 in the third), no notability is apparent. Quite the opposite, actually. How about the sources? It would require good sources for him to meet WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:GNG. The ja:wiki have some primary sources and a Gekisaka article that barely mentions him. web.ultra-soccer.jp have several pieces which is WP:ROUTINE coverage in my view. Geschichte (talk) 17:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Senegal, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rakibul Hasan

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

Fails to meet significant coverage criteria. I PRODed this article but then discovered it had already been done in the past so am now AFDing it. Shrug02 (talk) 17:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, Bangladesh, and Italy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSBASIC no WP:SIGCOV, listings/routine fixtures only. What little MSM coverage there is comprises match stats and short bios listing teams/fixtures. Confusingly, there's also a Rakibul Hasan (cricketer, born 2002) out there who is no more notable. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akshata Krishnamurthy

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

Page does not seem to meet WP:NACADEMIC, reads more like a self-promotional page, and focuses more on what the subject's projects have achieved rather than the subject themselves. Tammy0507 (talk) 13:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Spaceflight, and India. Shellwood (talk) 13:16, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per half agreement with nom. Although we can rewrite the article, if NACADEMIC is not met, there is no point Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 15:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The subject could meet GNG and not PROF. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I find it interesting when a user's first edit on Wikipedia is to nominate a page for deletion, as is the case here. DaffodilOcean (talk) 22:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Added Fortune India's Most Powerful Women List reference, and other interview references. Subject passes WP:GNG as there seem to be sufficient WP:RS. Shiv989 (talk)
Comment. I don't believe WP:PROF is met by citations; if one removes the heavily co-authored papers the highest cited on GS is 13. I am concerned that this nomination is brought by a new editor, and that a previous prod was made by another new editor. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Espresso Addict: And the article was created by a new editor as well. Your point being...? Tammy0507 (talk) 15:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's rare for new editors to find the deletion processes early in their career here. Espresso Addict (talk) 15:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe some of us are looking for a WP:CLEANSTART :) Tammy0507 (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - four of the sources are actually from one issue of Forbes India. Bearian (talk) 02:40, 17 November 2024 (UTCIpigott (talk) 13:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sufficient coverage to meet general notability. Probably much more in the Indian press.--Ipigott (talk) 13:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. We don't usually put so much weight on the kind of listicle coverage as in Forbes. Apart from that, I see only press releases, the subject's own articles, and early career awards. Looks WP:TOOSOON. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 19:44, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - might be worth noting coverage, mostly in Indian press - [2], [3],[4], [5], [6], [7], [8].. --Shiv989 (talk) 06:55, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the Economic Times article (which is, if you read it, admits to being basically a reproduction of the subject's Instagram page), and to a certain extent the News18 report, I would cast serious doubts on whether the cited sources are actually reliable sources. Tammy0507 (talk) 10:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, I would like to remind editors what constitutes a reliable source and refer to WP:Reliable sources/News Organizations:

Human interest reporting is generally not as reliable as news reporting, and may not be subject to the same rigorous standards of fact-checking and accuracy (see Junk food news)

I do not see any source in this article and discussion that does not qualify as Human interest reporting. Tammy0507 (talk) 10:35, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 08:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete 45 sources for a three-para article? Good grief. No, you're not getting a source analysis, but the sourcing is clearly (as has been noted extensively above) problematic. The awards are, not one of them, bluelinked. Fails WP:GNG - a lot of window dressing, clearly a talented individual, but we lack the substance required for notability. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Priya Hassan

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

I created Draft:Priya Hassan and despite it being well sourced, it was rejected at AfC. Now a different user, recreated the draft topic but as an article albeit with barely any sources and only 1 reliable source. The draft was deleted but I requested at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. All of the sources on the draft were interviews mostly.

Unneccesary AfD, I put a PROD on the draft but creator removed it. Likely not notable as a director due to lack of wide spread non interview (primary) sources. If this article needs to be kept, it needs to be merged with the draft. The draft had many sources from here [9], many of which relate to the production of the films themselves, not her. DareshMohan (talk) 07:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Karnataka. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: and merge the Draft into it (that was deleted at the time of creation. However, why was DareshMohan's draft rejected?). She meets WP:DIRECTOR in my view; the two films she directed seem notable enough. She does qualify for a page. Mushy Yank (talk) 11:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only reasons I can think of was that the film Bindaas Hudugi wasn't linked in the draft, the film Jambada Hudugi itself is in dire need of more sources (and given its lowkey release, the 100 days claim seems doubtful [10]) and the lack of article for Smuggler despite having five sources. Bindaas Hudugi also running for hundred days is doubtful (in which and how many theaters? [11]). Main reason is all sources are about films and not about her itself, but to be fair she didn't do that many films. DareshMohan (talk) 09:08, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stu Megan

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. Some passing mentions in the ext links but not sufficient for a WP:BLP. No indication of significance. Been on the cat:nn list for 10+ years. No updates. scope_creep^Talk 08:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 11:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, England, Canada, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eva Kurowski

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO, WP:SINGER. No indication of significance.Single ref is a profile. Been on the cat:nn list for 10+ years, never been updated. No coverage. scope_creep^Talk 08:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 11:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The La Donnas

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

Fails WP:NBAND. Been on the cat:nn list for more than 10+ years. No indication of significance. scope_creep^Talk 08:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Colorado. Shellwood (talk) 11:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aruba Mirza

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

Fails WP:NACTOR. References are a mixture of not mentioning Mirza, passing mentions and interviews 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Pakistan. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:35, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article needs some serious cleanup. She's a noted participant in a notable show: https://tribune.com.pk/story/2437664/voters-declare-aruba-mirza-winner-of-tamasha-season-2 https://24newshd.tv/24-Sep-2023/fans-disapprove-of-aruba-mirza-s-victory-in-popular-tv-show-tamasha https://www.trendinginsocial.com/tamasha-season-2-winner/ Coverage about her private life also abounds. She does seem to be notable enough. (FWIW Various roles presented as lead/main in the articles about series she played in). Mushy Yank (talk) 19:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. She has done both supporting and lead roles and in this source it is mentioned how she started her career also she appeared in Tamasha Season 2 and she won.(BeauSuzanne (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2024 (UTC))^[1]^[2][reply]
Comment - As a winner of a notable TV show I would say there "should" be significant coverage, but everything presented in the discussion with the exception of this has no byline and would be churnalism or otherwise unreliable. I also found some tabloid-type references about an engagement but those wouldn't be suitable for notability. Is there by chance an alternative spelling of the name I can use for search; or, any non-English sources that someone can point out that would be considered significant coverage?--CNMall41 (talk) 22:39, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I will check in other languages news usually in Urdu.(BeauSuzanne (talk) 10:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC))[reply]

References

^ "Aruba Mirza calls herself 'Papa ki pari'". ARY News. 24 July 2023.
^ "Voters declare Aruba Mirza winner of 'Tamasha Season 2'". The Express Tribune.

Draftify: For the time being until more reliable sources are added. Wikibear47 (talk) 07:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article includes sufficient references to meet GNG. Notable sources, such as The News (Ruling the Charts), ARY News (Papa Ki Pari, Kahani Kahan Se Shuru Hui), The News (Rang Mahal Final Episode), and The Express Tribune, provides substantial coverage of the subject's career, media appearances, TV roles, and win in a popular show. Additionally, other brief mentions in various sources contribute to satisfying the WP:SIGCOV.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 15:25, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Clearly passes Wp:GNG and Wp:NACTOR. Subject has done multiple significant roles in notable Tv shows.

Zuck28 (talk) 15:52, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable name in drama industry and passes notability criteria. Referencing is enough to establish that, Urdu news items are also from mainstream Urdu media. Muneebll (talk) 10:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Despite the request, no coverage has been presented that show significant coverage. I see keep votes stating "clearly" notable or making the claim of being a "notable name" or having significant roles but not supported by references required by WP:NACTOR. Regardless of roles, there needs to be significant coverage to show it. Notability is not inherent. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NACTOR is met. Based on the provided references, each offers moderate coverage, and the combined use of multiple independent sources can effectively establish notability. — MimsMENTOR ^talk 09:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel otherwise which is why I say significant coverage has not been presented. Of the five presented as evidence in this AfD (note it is four as one is a duplicate), all fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA with the exception of this which I would question as reliable based on no listed editorial guidelines and advertising which includes "article publishing." I am open to review anything else someone wants to provide. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:54, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. While there are numerous sources available online covering her career, TV appearances, and roles, individually, they may not meet the threshold for significant coverage. However, when considered collectively, they do. As for your concern about paid content, none of the sources are affiliated with WP:NEWSORGINDIA, as they all come from Pakistani media, not Indian outlets (not saying that your indications are wrong or right). — MimsMENTOR ^talk 06:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is sometimes confusion about the name NEWSORGINDIA (which I think needs to be changed by the way), but there are several editors who agree it applies to media in that region as a whole, not just the country. Regardless, we can call it churnalism which is essentially the same thing. Reprinted press releases, paid media, etc. It doesn't have to be paid to fall under that guideline. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Churnalism" can be addressed separately if you want to mention it in that context, and that's fine. However, NEWSORGINDIA still applies as a guideline for Indian media, even if editors agree it's intended for the broader subcontinental region (which I believe is what you were referring to). That said, I don’t see a valid reason to delete this article under WP:NEXIST. — MimsMENTOR ^talk 09:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel I can no longer discuss as it is going in circles. Let me be clear......I agree with you on NEXIST. The problem is that I have searched for suitable sources and they do not exist. The ones presented by keep votes are not reliable or not significant. We don't just assume sources must exists if we have searched for and been unable to locate them. --CNMall41 (talk) 09:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Clearly passes criteria 1 of WP:NACTOR. Even if WP:GNG is not met, that doesn't matter as the sources prove an WP:SNG is met. SNGs are a perfectly valid pathway to establishing notability under policy.4meter4 (talk) 19:47, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is incorrect. WP:ANYBIO says people are presumed notable when there is significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources, but that people are only likely to be notable if they meet the following standards, of which NACTOR is one. That is, NACTOR creates a refutable likelihood of notability. The guideline specifically says meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. What really matters is the secondary sources from which the page can be written. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:04, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep has a clear majority but these aren't very strong arguments. Keep folks: what sources do you find the most convincing? If there are strong sources in Urdu, can we see them?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Week Keep: Again, deletion is not cleanup; subject passes C1 WP:Anybio per the award and WP:Nactor. Kaizenify (talk) 13:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as, per the relist comments, and per CNMall41, the sourcing is just not there. ANYBIO C1 does not apply - this is not a significant award. NACTOR criterion 1 looks stronger, but meeting NACTOR criterion 1 does not guarantee the subject should be included, per the SNG guidelines themselves. As no one has been able to provide suitable sourcing from which a page could be written, there is no reason to keep this page. I would be happy with a redirect if anyone can suggest something suitable. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom and CNMall41. Fails to clear notability and GNG too. Keep !votes aren't convincing enough and the sources provided do not make it past SIGCOV and GNG threshold. — Benison (Beni · talk) 04:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tomohiro Hatta

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

BLP. No indication of signifance. BLP prod removed. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 07:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 11:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magwayen Creative Scholars' Guild

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG, lack of credible sources. Cites are all blog sources. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 06:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre, Organizations, Schools, and Philippines. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 06:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - The main problem is sources. There is a chance of better sources being out there.

Sushidude21! (talk) 07:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gilman Louie

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

non-notable person who created an article about themselves. 1keyhole (talk) 05:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The article has been expanded since creation, and Gilmanl's current authorship is around 3%, so I'm not too concerned there. Notability is the bigger concern. The coverage in The Christian Science Monitor is significant, reliable (see WP:CSMONITOR), secondary, and independent. Finding a second source is harder. Most other sources the article cites are not independent, unless the government [12] counts as independent. A Vox article [13] I found may have significant enough coverage, or it may not. More than one sentence addresses Louie directly. Regardless, being on the Foreign Affairs Policy Board might mean WP:NPOL applies. I'm at a weak keep for now. PrinceTortoise (he/him) ^{(poke • inspect)} 07:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Video games, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gina F. Acosta

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

Fails WP:NPOL. A staff member at the Office of the Vice President of the Philippines does not count toward WP:NPOL Ibjaja055 (talk) 05:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Multiple secondary sources such as The Philippine Star, Daily Tribune and GMA News Online have covered this government official from the Office of the Vice President (OVP). The OVP's questionable use of confidential funds under VP Sara Duterte has been among the top issues discussed in Philippine politics this year, if not the topmost (alongside tensions in the South China Sea and the POGO menace), and much of the Philippine media has been extensively covering the hearings conducted on this matter by the House Committee on Good Government in the past few months ([14][15][16][17][18]).

On November 5, Acosta was among the seven OVP officials who issued a position letter asking that the house congressional inquiry into their budget use be terminated ([19]), and by November 11 was among the four OVP officials ordered arrested based on a contempt citation issued by the committee for their non-attendance at the hearings ([20]). During the November 20 hearing, OVP chief of staff Zuleika T. Lopez and a branch manager of Land Bank of the Philippines gave testimonies that pinpointed Acosta as the OVP official who directly handled the confidential funds of the vice president ([21][22]). The varied independent coverage cited in this paragraph alone, in my view, merits notability for the article; further coverage in the media is also anticipated in the aftermath of the testimonies given in the Nov. 20 hearing. LionFosset (talk) 06:09, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LionFosset All the sources you mentioned are good but they do not count toward WP:GNG sources. The subject fails Wikipedia criteria for politician and non WP:GNG sources cannot be used for WP: SIGCOV. Please read more about WP:NPOL. Ibjaja055 (talk) 06:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 11:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yoshimitsu

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

The reception section is a mess of listicles and "anything not nailed down" types of articles. While there can be some degree of commentary gleamed for Yoshimitsu, it's brief and often repetitive. Even checking sources I've used in the past for Soulcalibur characters doesn't offer much at all. There's just no meat on this bone that I can find. Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:13, 21 November 2024 (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) 05:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Honestly, I'm leaning forward to being neutral in this situation. I feel like there's a chance the character might be notable since they have been involved in two fighting game franchises and have almost appeared in every main game of each franchise and gone through multiple distinct designs. Otherwise, the best source I could find about Yoshimitsu is [23]. These sources might also help [24], [25], [26], [27], and [28]. Aside from that, this character has three incarnations throughout the Tekken and Soulcalibur franchises, so if the character information is going to be merged, then the Tekken version of Yoshimitsu should be merged in Characters of the Tekken series, and the Soulcalibur version of Yoshimitsu should be merged in Characters of the Soulcalibur series. Kazama16 (talk) 07:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Den of Geek one is the strongest source coupled with Jasper's commentary on the Tekken character ranking list. The main problem though is that the Game Rant and CGMag refs are echoes of some of the commentary from that one on the designs and could be summed up as "his appearance changes frequently", PushSquare is basically death battle commentary in this case, and The Gamer and 3DPrint refs are both about fan works (I checked to see if the designer on the latter had some notability that could help but no dice). I feel there may not be enough actually said for SIGCOV when the sources are lined up is my concern.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grema Sulaiman

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

All the sources Fail WP:GNG. Being a director of a non-notable organisation does not count toward WP:SNG. Ibjaja055 (talk) 05:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lords and margraves of Bergen op Zoom

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

Uncited article on an unnotable office. -Samoht27 (talk) 00:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, Royalty and nobility, and Netherlands. -Samoht27 (talk) 00:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Bergen op Zoom#History (provided it is properly sourced). That article mentions the margravate. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge indeed. Title abolished in 1795 is a fascinating footnote and barely more. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think the article is too large to merge into the Bergen op Zoom history section, the result would be too unbalanced. I have provided three references. Bergen op Zoom is very proud of its history as margraviate. The palace of the margraves is a wonderful museum. The article on the list of Lords and Margraves is very interesting and useful.Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 17:08, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Neither article is even remotely large. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Size is a relative concept. The history section in the Bergen op Zoom article is four paragraphs, 320 words. Very short. The Lords and margraves article is 200 words. Large, relative to the short history section. Merge the two and the result is unbalanced, in my opinion. That´s all. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 01:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Given there is a museum dedicated to the margraves at Bergen op Zoom, it is a historically notable topic.4meter4 (talk) 00:42, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I presume there was no effort made to establish the nature of the 'musuem dedicated to the margraves at Bergen op Zoom'. It is the Markiezenhof, the oldest city palace in the Netherlands and it is not 'dedicated to the margraves'. And its existence and purpose doesn't make the list of lords and margraves of that place any more notable, properly referenced, germane or necessary. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:54, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Markiezenhof is not exactly a museum about the margraves, it is a museum named after the margraves. Still, the three Stijlkamers, three rooms of the permanent exhibit, are dedicated to Margrave Maria Henriette de la Tour d´Auvergne. So, a part of the museum is dedicated to the margraves, in particular to one of them. Anyway, I have added one more reference, a 170 page book specifically about the Lords and margraves, to further strengthen my case that the topic deserves a standalone article. Best, Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 02:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - European noble titles / families are notable when adequately sourced, and this one is. It's a bit too large to merge comfortably to the Bergen op Zoom article. Ingratis (talk) 07:01, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 04:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Feel that reasons stated by keep voters above are just so. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary M. Hymes

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

The sources Fail General Notability Guide and specific Notability Guidelines for WP:ANYBIO Ibjaja055 (talk) 04:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Coverage from current sources does not seem signficant. One nomination for Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Stunt Coordination does not satisfy WP:ANYBIO. A cursory Google search turned up an LA Times article involving Hymes [29], but the coverage of Hymes himself is not significant. PrinceTortoise (he/him) ^{(poke • inspect)} 05:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 08:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kilbil St Joseph's High School

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL. Only a primary source provided. 4 google news hits, none indepth. LibStar (talk) 00:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Maharashtra. LibStar (talk) 00:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I was unable to locate any sources. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 00:46, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- Delete - Doesn't establish notability. Draftify if you can find other better sources, else delete
Sushidude21! (talk) 07:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Davide Lombardi

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

A draft that was moved into mainspace. It's mostly sourced with press releases. A WP:BEFORE search failed. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Engineering, and Italy. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV (barely). There definitely needs to be some serious pruning of bad promotional sources and writing, reformatting of the article, editing for encyclopedic tone, etc. However, there are four articles among the references which are independent significant coverage about Davide Lombardi; three of which are in the LightSoundJournal, which is a professional publication for light and audio engineers, and one of which is from an Italian media source. He works as a sound engineer for notable artists, so I am leaning on the keep side.4meter4 (talk) 03:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@4meter4 That's a valid point; however, a reminder to anyone else reading this that Lombardi doesn't inherit notability from the people he works with. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 04:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete They are all interviews - and in trade media, at that. The other sources are blogs or references to events where the subject has worked. Doesn't pass WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Sartre

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

Fails WP:GNG. No WP:SIGCOV from secondary sources that shows notability. Demt1298 (talk) 02:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Bibliographies. Demt1298 (talk) 02:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Draftify - Doesn't entirely establish notability. Needs better sources and better info. Too many red links, suggesting that not notable
Sushidude21! (talk) 07:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 02:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She is the subject of a number of profiles including Las Vegas Weekly, Jezebel, and Paper. She's also discussed in several academic sources as seen from a Google Scholar search: [30]. I think there is enough to meet GNG. Thriley (talk) 04:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There is a mix of moderate and trivial mentions, from databases or entertainment platforms that focus on her work rather than her broader impact. However, given the combination of in-depth interviews, mainstream coverage (Stern), and critical industry coverage from Las Vegas Weekly, Adult DVD Talk, the subject passes WP:SIGCOV.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 14:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender, California, and Nevada. • Gene93k (talk) 05:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. Not seeing a keep on sources now there. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lot Fire Records

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

Non notable business. Spam from blocked sock farm who built a walled garden. Lacks independent coverage about it, lots of PR placement which don't satisfy sourcing criterea, lacking independence. Wikipedia is not a PR platform. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page that just reproduces content from the main page:

duffbeerforme (talk) 03:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all to Bash Luks and copy edit/trim for encyclopedic tone. While I can understand the need to cleanup after a sock editor with a coi, the referencing in this case is not bad. The articles use multiple reliable news sources from Uganda and Ghana where Bash Luks and/or Lot Fire Records are the primary subject. The Kampala Dispatch and Tower Post are reputable newspapers. News Ghana is a reputable news portal. Capital Radio (ie 91.3 Capital FM) is also reputable. There is certainly enough reliable secondary coverage to support an article on Bash Luks per WP:BASIC/WP:GNG. At this point I think Lot Fire Records would be better covered in that article because I don't think the record label as yet passes WP:NCORP. The list is small, and doesn't need to be a stand alone article.4meter4 (talk) 03:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Uganda. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sourced to press releases, the whole enterprise, its artists, its CEO are not notable. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kai Trump

AfDs for this article:

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

Previously deleted/redirected at AfD. Recreated by a new user and honestly the coverage doesn't look any better than it did at the first AfD, so I can't see it warranting a standalone article. Serious issues with WP:NOTINHERITED. Should be redirected back to Donald Trump Jr.#Family (EDIT: I am also fine redirecting back to Family of Donald Trump) as per the consensus of the last AfD. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, United States of America, People and Women. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as done previously and lock it to prevent repeated disruption. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 19:29, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Golf, Internet, Florida, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restore redirect per last AfD. This shouldn't even go to AfD, it should be up to those few who think it should be a standalone article to demonstrate what has changed and why that would change the previous AfD consensus. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Meets WP:GNG with multiple references focusing on her:

These references have all been published after the last AfD, and/or were not in the article during the last AfD. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 20:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of this coverage suggests that she is notable separate from her relationship to the broader Trump family, and is pretty insubstantial. Per Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Invalid_criteria That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:36, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She is covered in-depth in multiple WP:RS that are independent of her, which satisfies the requirements in WP:GNG. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 20:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a silly post that could be made about any subject whatsoever.

None of the sources at the article Julius Caesar suggest that he is notable separate from his relationship to his broader military and political achievements -- do you here suggest a redirect to Roman Empire per WP:NOPAGE? jp×g 🗯️ 00:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, but the valid reason would be that she has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. This is a point that is often misunderstood on Wikipedia, presumably because of WP:UPPERCASE shortcuts like WP:NOTINHERITED. If you actually read WP:NOTINHERITED, you'll see that it says Individuals in close, personal relationships with famous people (including politicians) can have an independent article even if they are known solely for such a relationship, but only if they pass WP:GNG. What it actually means is that people are not automatically notable just because they're related to someone – they can still meet GNG, even if that is all they are "known" for. C F A 💬 00:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What has she done that is actually noteworthy? These articles are basically puff pieces. We know she plays golf and that she was invited to give a speech at an RNC convention where she says Donald Trump a normal grandfather and that she has no interest in pursuing politics. The social media stuff in the article is irrelevant puffery. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 20:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The social media stuff is obviously not independent of her. But the 5 references above (and there are more in the article, I just listed the top 5) are all in-depth (not a casual mention), independent of her, and independent of each other. That's all that is needed for WP:GNG. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 21:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what? This isn't a policy-based argument. jp×g 🗯️ 14:35, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom., Iggy pop goes the weasel, Traumnovelle, and WP:NOPAGE. Sal2100 (talk) 20:47, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets GNG. See my comment above. C F A 💬 00:42, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I do feel that those opting for redirect are really failing to see the huge differences between this AFD and the previous one in July.

1.Firstly, Trump has made a YouTube channel as of October that has already received 220,000 subscribers (and more than 50k of those in the last 24 hours), has a video with over 2 million views in two days which has significant political interest and coverage in major news outlets (and a second video with over a million views).

2. Kai Trump has more than a million followers on TikTok and 500,000 followers on Instagram, which has all changed since the last AfD where she had 100,000 followers on Instagram for example.

3. The election of 9 days ago also casts her in a different light- she is a content creator who will have significant proximity to an in-power president between the ages of 17-21, and already has a huge audience and is receiving notable coverage. Do you really think that Kai Trump is going to fade into obscurity and never again achieve notability? Deleting this article is only going to delay publication for six months or less, and she is already receiving 9,000 plus article visits per day (not that this means anything for notability purposes, but the article clearly has demand and she clearly has significant attention).

In my opinion, the previous AFD fell the right way because of the fact she was only notable for her RNC speech- by all accounts she is now achieving notability for other reasons at this point, and she will continue to do so. There are now [sources] claiming that she is Trump's most important social media ally, etc. I would expect coverage on this subject to increase dramatically in the coming months with the inauguration and as she produces more content. Let us compare with her uncle Barron Trump (as she has been compared with before), who has been deleted via AFD before: this would suggest that Barron has attained nowhere close to the notable achievements or coverage that Kai has now received, with no sections of independent notability as far as I can tell. Kai's article Passes WP:GNG. I edited her article extensively yesterday though, so I would expect some degree of bias from me in trying to keep the article retained.Spiralwidget (talk) 01:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is a poorly-written article about a person whose accomplishments I find unimpressive. Sources obviously pass GNG. Is there a BLP issue, or some other urgent concern that makes GNG unsuitable here? Or is it just a politics thing? jp×g 🗯️ 02:16, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Family of Donald Trump. Not seeing any sources that are notable outside of Donald Trump, until she becomes notable by herself I can't vote keep. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect to Family of Donald Trump (1st choice) or back to Donald Trump Jr.#Family (2nd choice). (I think the family article is better than the father's article for the same anti-patriarchal reasons I detailed in the first AFD and won't repeat here.)

In the first AFD, I thought the article subject was just shy of meeting WP:GNG, with borderline sigcov from WP:TIER3 sources like [31] [32] [33] [34], with the best source at the time IMO being ABC News, though even that one had little in-depth information about the subject, and was mostly about the RNC speech.

The 5 new sources posted above don't really move the needle for me. #1 WP:DAILYBEAST is yellow at RSP, and anyway it's an opinion piece. #2 I'm not sure that EssentiallySports is an RS. #3 is not technically not independent of the other ABC News article, and anyway is more about the subject's election night vlog than about the subject herself. #4 is a routine signing report which usually don't count as sigcov of an athlete, and #5 NYT is about the RNC speech, like the earlier ABC News article, not in depth of the subject herself. What's missing is like two solid biographies of the subject; then I'd be convinced that there is so much material about the subject that it should be on its own page.

But for now, I think everything that meets WP:DUE/WP:ASPECT in all of those sources that is actually about the subject is only enough to fill up a section in an article, e.g. Family of Donald Trump. Even if the subject meets GNG, for WP:PAGEDECIDE reasons (readers will understand the subject better in the context of her family rather than as a stand-alone article, particularly since most of her notability is derived from her family, with her golf career constituting a minority of the overall RS coverage), I think it's better to cover this topic as part of another article rather than as its own article.

Also, I note that the prior AFD resulted in consensus to redirect, and it was edit-warred back into an article, which led to this second AFD (1, 2, 3). A trout to those editors for editing against consensus. The new information should have been added to the target article, and if a stand-alone was sought, a split should have been proposed on the target article's talk page per WP:PROSPLIT. Levivich (talk) 07:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain the distinction between "significant coverage of something a person did" and "significant coverage of the person"? I am confused by this claim. jp×g 🗯️ 14:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, probably easiest to show you examples, all from the same RS:

The #1 stories have some biographical information about the subjects, but they're really focused on specific events/statements/actions/etc. #2 are actual full-length biographies of the subject. You see a lot of differences in these types of stories: #1 is focused on a particular time and place, #2 spans the subject's entire lifetime. #1 includes a lot of quotes from the subject (what the subject said about the event/action/whatever), whereas #2 has much more in the BBC's own voice. (You can scroll through and just see that #2 has fewer quotation marks than #1.) #1 is usually shorter than #2, sometimes by half.

For our purposes -- writing a stand-alone biography article about a subject -- we can kinda/sorta do it with RSes like #1's, but you really need #2's to cover the subject's whole life, as opposed to just some action/event that happened during their life.

For this article subject (Kai Trump), we only have #1's, no #2's. Levivich (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per above discussion. I’m against any minor child of a political person or celebrity having an article, even if they have spoken in public about their parent or grandparent. Only Matt Gaetz is interested. Bearian (talk) 04:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have two comments to make here on this AfD after already giving my "keep" opinion a little further up.

1. Firstly, I would be concerned that a merge/redirect to Family of Donald Trump would destroy a lot of potentially important encyclopedic information in the article, such as Trump's RNC speech and her recent coverage of election night, as well as information about her name being related to her grandfather and such. The current Family of Donald Trump article has only a short section on grandchildren, and it would be difficult for me to see how a redirect/merge would fit in with the format of that article. I think that merging to "Donald Trump Jr." would be preferable, but the problem there is that Kai Trump does not actually have any significant activity directly related to her father; appearing at the RNC and her social media and golf activities all seem very unrelated to her father, especially considering the fact her parents are divorced and she actually lives with her mother. It also seems to perpetuate stereotypes relating to patriarchy to redirect to father. I therefore find a redirect or merge to be less than ideal in this circumstance.

2. Secondly, I have a real issue with Wikipedia attitudes as regards social media influencers and younger influential people as it stands. I distinctly remember having a similar argument about Niko Omilana when I first made that article. As a younger editor myself, I feel it is important to point out that these people are household names to a degree. People in my social group and my age range have almost all heard of people like Niko Omilana or Kai Trump, and she is seen from my perspective as more of an influencer with her own brand than a relative of Donald Trump- without a doubt her grandfather is a part of her brand, but it is honestly rather derisive of younger people to just expect that all of their life has a focus on their family She clearly receives significant independent coverage on her "social media brand", which I would characterise as "rich republican golf girl", such as [[35]] and [[36]]. Another example is Deji Olatunji, which currently redirects to KSI despite clearly passing GNG, partially because people underestimate the fame, influence and importance of these figures for a younger audience- again, these are the celebrities and personalities that are the most important and discussed among people below the age of 25, and they without a doubt pass GNG. I find it both patronising, astonishing and frustrating that such articles are routinely struck down by people that in my opinion have not got the finger on the pulse of the way fame and influence is being peddled, and Wikipedia itself is in danger of being left behind if it is not more forgiving to younger subjects. The information is clear, it is well-cited, and it receives coverage in multiple reliable independent sources, so what's the big fuss? The bottom line will be that when young people search online for their idols and role models and such, they will be looking at their instagram account rather than Wikipedia, and I think that is a crying shame.Spiralwidget (talk) 12:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What you call "a crying shame," I call the entire point of Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Fame and popularity are not sufficient for inclusion in the encyclopedia. It's not about her age, or profession (many influencers with huge followings are nevertheless not notable), it's about this: Wikipedia summarizes sources. For a Wikipedia biography article, the sources are other biographies. Wikipedia should never be the first place to publish someone's biography. So to vote keep on a biography, I'm looking for at least 2, preferably 3, totally independent (of each other and of the subject) full-length biographies. That's what gives us enough source material to write a Wikipedia biography article that meets NPOV. Kai Trump doesn't appear to have been the subject of any full biographies, much less two or three. (The RSes I've seen so far have some biographical information, but very little, and I wouldn't call any of them in-depth biographies.) As it so happens, there are many famous people who aren't the subject of biographies (athletes, influencers, famous people's kids); they don't qualify for Wikipedia articles IMO. And everything we have to say about Kai Trump--all the info in RSes that's WP:DUE or a significant WP:ASPECT--can be said in a paragraph or two that can be part of the family article (which could have multiple mini-biographies about various not-quite-notable members of the family). The RNC speech, for example, is one sentence, that says she gave a speech at the RNC. That's all there is to say about it. Levivich (talk) 18:32, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the family of Donald Trump. It doesn't need an independent article. Shkuru Afshar (talk) 05:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Family of Donald Trump. Notability is not inherited. This is, at best WP:TOOSOON. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:13, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per some of the keep discussion above. It clearly passes WP:GNG and this is way different from the previous deletion discussion in July with more references. Kaizenify (talk) 07:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Family of Donald Trump. The new coverage is still entirely connected to her grandfather. Notability is not inherited. I don't doubt at some point this may change, but so far it hasn't. It's WP:TOOSOON for an independent article. FYI, telling us how many followers someone has on social media is a clear sign that someone is scraping desperately at the bottom of the non-notability barrel.4meter4 (talk) 02:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Likely TOOSOON. Playing golf isn't notable, there is coverage of a speech given, but being social media star in 2024 isn't notable alone. We've had a flood of coverage since the event, but nothing before. I'm not sure this person is notable for what they've done; outside of the Trump name, what have they done to be notable. She's a "potentially notable" influencer, so nothing notable at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 04:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: You see the name, you want to know who it is. It's as simple as that. Cyber rigger (talk) 08:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Culturenet Cymru

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

Culturenet Cymru was established as a company within the National Library of Wales for the purpose of creating a body that Welsh Government could fund outside of the NLW sponsorship arrangement, with a remit to develop online resources. The company was based in NLW, all the directors and officers were NLW staff, and the employees were subject to NLW regulations. The arrangement was wound up in 2016 and all of the projects were transferred directly into NLW. It was never independently notable, generating a couple of news articles (that I cannot now find) only when one employee, whose contract was terminated, alleged he had fixed an online poll they ran. That coverage did not explore the nature of the company, and my recollection is that the news media were directed to NLW itself. As such this is not notable and does not meet WP:NCORP. I was going to redirect to the NLW page but it is not mentioned there, and I do not feel a mention of the company is due there. Thus a redirect is not possible (no mention on the target page). I am therefore nominating here. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries, Companies, Popular culture, and Internet. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it isn't notable enough for a stand-alone article, as I cannot find any significant coverage in independent sources. Redirect to 100 Welsh Heroes, its one notable project, where Culturenet Cymbru is briefly described (and is an article that has survived AfD). Schazjmd (talk) 21:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:49, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I searched for information about this company on every search engine but found nothing. I don’t believe it is notable or meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for companies (WP:NCORP). Baqi:) (talk) 08:49, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-46508394 JD John M. Turner (talk) 22:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to National Library of Wales per WP:ATD or keep for passing WP:SIGCOV. A basic WP:BEFORE search shows plenty of coverage in google books such as [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], etc This was a notable project and the content would be a reasonable subsection in the NLW article. I also see no issue with leaving it as a stand alone article. Either way, deletion or a redirect to 100 Welsh Heroes is not the answer as the organization was involved in multiple large digitization projects of note; some of which are the primary subject of journal articles viewable in this Google Scholar search. 4meter4 (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SIGCOV must be more than a mention. Indeed, Culturenet must meet WP:NORG as the appropriate SNG. The guidance on SIGCOV may be found under WP:ORGDEPTH which says, inter alia,
Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization. Such coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements, and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about the organization.
Your references 2-6 are all passing mentions. "Culturenet's gathering the jewels" or a caption for an image, or "now available on..." are all passing mentions. None of these are SIGCOV by any margin, let alone ORGDEPTH. The first reference is longer. It has a paragraph about what CultureNet was remitted to do. It is not, to my mind, coverage at ORGDEPTH, but that one is moot in any case. The paragraph was written by CyMAL: Museums Archives and Libraries Wales for the Welsh Affairs Committee Evidence, included in a section on the National Library. CyMAL was a division of Welsh Government, and Welsh Government sponsor NLW. CyMAL funded Culturenet's GTJ and other such projects. This, then, is a primary source and not independent. It is Welsh Government telling the Welsh Affairs committee about the work it is doing. To meet WP:NORG (or WP:GNG for that matter), multiple sources must have significant coverage, and be independent, reliable secondary sources. See WP:SIRS. None of these meet these criteria. Redirecting to 100 Welsh Heroes per Schazjmd would be more sensible as a WP:ATD. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that the coverage is trivial. There are multiple journal articles with the organization in the title of the article in google scholar. These in combination with the book sources (of which I just randomly listed the first books in the search; but there were pages of book hits) would pass WP:GNG and WP:ORGCRIT. The scope of the Culturenet Cymru makes 100 Welsh Heroes a bad merge target; although it would be ok as a redirect. Doing that however, would lose encyclopedic information of value which would be WP:DUEWEIGHT in the article on the National Library of Wales. Given your argument that company has essentially been folded into the NLW in your deletion nomination, the NLW is clearly the better target for both a merge and a redirect.4meter4 (talk) 17:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that the coverage is trivial. To take just one of these as an example, we read: "All-Wales examples include Culturenet Cymru's Gathering the Jewels (20,000-plus items) and the National Library's Digital Mirror (0.5m-plus items)..." (Osmond, 2006). Now compare that text to the relevant section of ORGDEPTH I quote above. This is not significant coverage. Not under GNG and certainly not under NORG. And they are all at this level. Maybe the problem here is that your "randomly listed" selection is where the BEFORE was not carried out. Why do you think I am unfamiliar with that literature? But where is the deep or significant coverage about Culturenet? Where is the coverage that extends well beyond brief mentions? The information from which an article can be written? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because cherry picking the weakest source of the bunch, and misrepresenting the quoted text in that source by taking it out of paragraph/section context is a balanced and fair way to do source analysis 🙄.4meter4 (talk) 19:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 20:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As a (sometimes controversial) body funded by government, it should stay. Deb (talk) 16:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was a company, not an assembly sponsored public body. It needs to pass WP:NORG. Do you have independent secondary sources about the controversy? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 23:58, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was a government funded and run initiative, it was never a private institution/company. Read the sources.4meter4 (talk) 23:56, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are incorrect. Please read the nom. statement again. It was constituted as a company.[43] It was specifically arranged so that it was not run by the Welsh Government, and although it got project funding from the Government, this was in the manner that other companies are awarded project funding and it was not a sponsorship arrangement. So again, WP:NORG is the SNG. What sources do we have that meet WP:ORGDEPTH? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A company run and funded by the government. I think you are splitting hairs.4meter4 (talk) 15:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was not run by the government. It was run by company employees under directorrship of employees of the National Library, which is itself not run by the government (although it has a Government remit letter). I am not splitting hairs. The whole point was to set it up as a company because it was not an arm of Government. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:38, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:WIKILAWYERING as it relates to following the spirit of policies.4meter4 (talk) 18:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are going to have to unpack this for me. What exactly are you arguing for here? That this company should not be subjected to the need to have significant coverage in multiple reliable independent secondary sources (WP:SIRS)? Why? because it was funded primarily through Government project funding? Note that WP:NORG says

This page is to help determine whether an organization (commercial or otherwise)...is a valid subject for a separate Wikipedia article dedicated solely to that organization.

The guidelines surely and evidently therefore apply to Culturenet Cymru PLC. It seems to me that if you are arguing (incorrectly in my view) that this was nothing but an arm of governemnt, it is even less notable. Its notability for a standalone page surely must derive from its separation from the National Library (whose staff were the company officers). It is either not notable because it was nothing but an arm of the library, or it may be notable as a standalone organisation - if it meets NORG. Which is it? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 21:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saying that in this particular case, this specific company should be treated the way we would treat any government run and government funded program because in any way that essentially matters that's what this company was. It was created through government legislation, it was founded using tax payer dollars, and it was managed by a government institution. Trying to treat it like a normal for profit private business under WP:ORG policy doesn't seem to meet the spirit of our principals; particularly when the product being produced was for free public consumption within a national library. In otherwords, demanding WP:ORGCRIT here seems WP:POINTY.4meter4 (talk) 21:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We do treat all such organisations this way See NORG "Commercial or otherwise". Note that I have throughout said NORG and not NCORP. Profit is not the issue. The lack of sources about the organisation is the issue. It needs to meet ORGCRIT because that is the relevant SNG as it would be for, say, a Government funded school. And I don't think you have read what POINTY means. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:03, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT comments aren't helpful. WP:ORGCRIT was created as a means of critiquing the notability of for-profit business like Google or Microsoft or any other clearly for-profit business. It wasn't designed to handle weird cases like this which involve government managing bodies and products which are being created for free public consumption in a weird blend of public-private partnership. This company's goals better allign with the goals of a non-profit and the scrutiny we developed to support the WP:NOTPROMO model for-profit companies under WP:ORGCRIT are not appropriately applied in the context of an organization that was essentially created to do large scale digitization projects and research in the context of a national library that has free access to people in Wales. At some point WP:COMMONSENSE has to come into play and a consideration of the spirit of our policies at the WP:Five Pillars. You are welcome to keep pushing WP:ORGCRIT, but I think its WP:POINTY to do so per WP:5P5 and not beneficial to the project.4meter4 (talk) 22:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At this point you have accused me of cherry picking, misrepresentation, wikilawyering, Ididnthearthat and pointiness (twice). It is clear you are not going to assume good faith. I'll leave it there with you. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 23:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well you have done some of those things. Cherry picking (be honest you picked the worst source out of the ones listed to highlight), misrepresentation (you did take that one source out of context of the paragraph), wikilawyering (you are being pedantic on a particular policy that wasn't designed to handle a company of this kind), Ididnthearthat (you were ignoring what I was saying and repeating arguments after every editors comments that disagreed) and pointiness (you are trying to make a point with ORGCRIT after it was pointed out to why it doesn't fit well in this context). I don't think you are intentionally trying to be disruptive, and that you are contributing with good intent and in the best way you know how. I do think you have lost perspective, and are not listening well to what other editors are saying.4meter4 (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm not seeing extensive coverage. A search in ["Culturenet Cymru" -wikipedia site:.bbc.com] yielded little. As well as 2 google news hits. and passing mentions in google books. Fails WP:ORG. There is no inherent notability in being government funded. This source and this found by 4meter is are 1 line mentions and not SIGCOV. and I can't find specific reference in this. This one is 2 lines of mention in a whole book. LibStar (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar Would you support a merge to National Library of Wales per WP:ATD?4meter4 (talk) 00:51, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on merge/redirect to National Library of Wales as an WP:ATD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melissa Tan

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

Other than winning the national Miss Universe in 2006, nothing of note can be found on her since then. – robertsky (talk) 03:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Beauty pageants, and Malaysia. – robertsky (talk) 03:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. We certainly don't have to accept this because it is just an essay, but Wikipedia:WikiProject Beauty Pageants/Notability (beauty pageant participants) states that national pageant winners in the big four pageants (of which Miss Universe is one) are generally presumed to be notable. Meaning that its likely WP:SIGCOV exists. Given the year she won, it is possible the coverage was more offline than online as it was in the weird time period where everything hadn't yet shifted over even though the internet was up and running. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well... I tried doing WP:BEFORE through wikipedia library, and could only find two articles in 2007:
- Civic thrill for beauty queen: [New Sunday Times Edition]
Summary: About her purchase of Honda Civic.
- Celeb style [Malay Mail]
Summary: Interview about her fashion style.
– robertsky (talk) 04:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not surprised. The pageant would have not been covered in the UK or the United States but would have been covered in Southeast Asia. The best sources are probably offline (at that time; maybe digitized now?) newspapers in Malaysia, and I don’t believe most are available through The Wikipedia Library.4meter4 (talk) 05:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above two articles were accessed through ProQuest in The Wikipedia Library and are from the two of the major newspapers in the country at that time. – robertsky (talk) 06:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and they are both English sources which tends to cover a different type of content scope targeted more toward English speaking expats. I would expect better coverage in the Maylay language papers.4meter4 (talk) 06:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gunnar Norberg

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

Yet another hyperlocal politician in the walled garden created to boost Carmel-by-theSea who fails WP:NPOLITICIAN as mayor of a tiny town, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. The article is filled with fluff and neither demonstrates nor verifies notability. Even the NYT reference is a passing mention. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm not seeing notability, this is more of a play-by-play of the person's life, career and death. Sources are pretty much is discussed in the nomination. I don't find anything esle. Oaktree b (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is another article on a non-notable mayor of Carmel-by-the-Sea, a town of about 3,000 people. The sourcing is hyper-local or sourced to their own autobiography. The article is part of what some editors have called a "walled garden", the purpose of which was boosterism and WP:PROMO. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, WP:GNG and WP:NBUSINESSPERSON. Netherzone (talk) 19:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Oaktree b, I don't know if you saw that someone removed a lot of the content and sources before the article was nominated for AfD. I don't know if they were right or wrong to do so, but it is impossible to evaluate the article without this material, and so I think it should be kept in until someone explains why they though the deleted sources were not acceptable even for non-controversial material. I have restored some of it pending the result of this AfD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's quite a bit more in the article now, but I'm not sure if it makes this person notable. Being in the War, acting, politician. Seems like an interesting life, but this still feels like an extended CV, nothing really for a wiki article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers, this is part of a "walled garden" of Carmel promo, this ANI will provide more context:[44] (final ANI discussion), which led to the creator's site ban.The editor had a long history of COI and undisclosed paid-editing, poor sourcing, self-published sources, COI sources, and deliberately misrepresenting sources to make subjects appear notable. Additionally, there was LOUTsocking. The editor who deleted some of the material, u|Left guide|Left guide, was working on clean up efforts removing hyperlocal sourcing, paid-COI sourcing, self-published sources, and questionable sources. These were not some random drive-by deletions. The problems went on for many years before the editor was community blocked/banned. Netherzone (talk) 00:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I just read the thread over at ANI, what a situation that was. Oaktree b (talk) 02:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The deletions made to the article left it ungrammatical and were done very poorly, leaving a highly misleading picture of the article for reviewers at AfD. Let people review the article with the sources, and we'll see what the result of the AfD really is. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Outlands_in_the_Eighty_Acres#History: mentioned there; merge necessary content if possible. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Re dir can always be created later, but deleting it first gives a level of protection against surreptitious resurrection by COI editors, a real concern with articles around Carmel-by-the-Sea topic demonstrated by multiple block evasion attempts by a certain editor. Graywalls (talk) 06:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets GNG, which is all that counts here, not the state of the article as it currently stands, nor how it got here. - SchroCat (talk) 08:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Agree with immediately preceding comment. Tim riley talk 09:10, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, leaning delete If notability is not met, it is clearly a problem- However. Even if GNG is met, if WP:BIO fails, it violates the BLP policy. Passing mention references aren't that acceptable either. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 13:13, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

Keep - a perfectly notable subject Jack1956 (talk) 21:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I’m confused: does the article even claim that he was notable? He was the mayor of a small town. In general, that does not establish notability on Wikipedia. Llajwa (talk) 19:18, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Critically fails WP:NPOL, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appears to pass WP:ANYBIO, WP:BASIC, and WP:SIGCOV. There are multiple independent book sources from reliable academic publishers, and newspaper articles with in-depth significant coverage. I'm not seeing a valid policy based rationale for deletion.4meter4 (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have "meets GNG" and "fails GNG" as arguments. Can we get a source table? And what's this about violating BLP policy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhareswar Mandir, Baldiabandha, Dhenkanal, Odisha

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

Exists in draftspace as well. Totally unsourced, and a WP:BEFORE search failed. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Hinduism and Odisha. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A shrine of Lord Sikhareswar in village Baldiabandha ia a well-known temple .Though not much publicity in newspapers/social media is there. Over the years, this religious institution has come up as a centre for Saivite worship.It is a green temple in serene natural environment in Dhenkanal.I earnestly submit to you consider this stub article,a part of subaltern history of this region.

Warm regards and gratitude JAMKUM (talk) 07:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Google News reveals nothing same goes with books and the article is written like an advert. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 00:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also I Draftify this because of that. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 00:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There’s something going on, and it’s impossible to determine if it’s being done in good faith (so we need to WP:AGF). IP editors are leaving comments on the talk page of the article and AfD begging for this article to be kept. I can understand one or two IP editors doing this, editing logged out out of principle is A Thing, but I’ve never seen this many IP editors do this. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:02, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undoubtedly there are people who are connected in some way to this temple that don't want the article deleted. It happens.4meter4 (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4 Perhaps! It's stopped, regardless. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. In doing a WP:BEFORE search, I located many sources which had SIGCOV of the Sikhareswar Mandir in Guwahati, Assam but could locate no sources about the temple of the same name in Baldiabandha, Dhenkanal, Odisha. I searched under all three names separately just in case and got zero hits. It's possible there are sources in the Odia language (the official language of that part of India) but that is beyond my skill set. Without evidence on this temple, and with the url links in the article not covering the temple, we have no choice but to delete.4meter4 (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Let's give it one more week. IP editors: you need to provide sources if you want this to be kept (see WP:42), or offer an WP:ATD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sir,

Thanks for benign consideration. JAMKUM (talk) 10:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dmitri Zakharov (footballer, born 2000)

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

Fails WP:GNG (WP:NBASIC).--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 02:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 21. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Draftify - Draftify until better sources are found.
Sushidude21! (talk) 07:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV/WP:SPORTSBASIC. I found coverage on a Russian scientist and a Russian television personality/broadcaster of the same name. Admittedly I am not a Russian speaker so my BEFORE may not have turned up something pertinent to notability on this particular Dmitri Zakharov. If something changes, ping me. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:09, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nileena Abraham

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

Despite winning an award - which many translators appear to win and that does not inherently make them eligible for a Wikipedia article – I am concerned that this subject does not meet WP:GNG. The citations are all primary or unreliable and I can't find any other reliable sources that cover the subject in a significant way.

Please assume good faith in this nomination. It's nothing personal! Thanks everyone. Missvain (talk) 22:26, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:46, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~. Would having been the Dr. Suniti Kumar Chatterji Professor of Bengali at the International School of Dravidian Linguistics, Thiruvananthapuram count as a named chair for the purposes of meeting WP:PROF? Also is the Who's who of Indian Writers, 1999: A-M considered completely unreliable? (Although the Google Books link given is incorrect, the subject does appear on pp. 7–8.[45]) Espresso Addict (talk) 23:25, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would find it very odd for someone with only Master's degrees to hold a C5-qualifying named chair. And the school isn't even notable itself! JoelleJay (talk) 02:42, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
JoelleJay I think it's easy to become very US/UK centric with these named chairs.

On the question of GNG, I found a substantial material on Abraham in JSTOR .5325/complitstudies.53.2.0359, which has substantive (~3pp) coverage of her work translating Arogyaniketan by Tarashankar Bandyopadhyay, with some bio material. Considered together with the award, and Who's Who entry, and given that the above source is talking about work in 1961 and not in English, I feel that further expert research offline by someone who speaks the relevant languages is likely to uncover more material, so I'm going with keep. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Espresso Addict who has has convinced me that this person meets WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 01:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alisha Palmowski

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMOTORSPORT as a driver who has only competed in entry level series (Ginetta Junior Championship and FIA Formula 4). Article is at best WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. MSportWiki (talk) 02:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Motorsport, United Kingdom, Sportspeople, and Women. MSportWiki (talk) 02:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft. Palmowski, is a F1 Academy wildcard driver, and since all F1 Academy drivers have pages, why not her? She is also the runner-up of the 2024 GB4 Championship and can be considered as a future prospect for female racing drivers. At least draft the page BurningBlaze05 (talk) 05:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

F1 Academy is an entry-level series, therefore its' competitors don't meet notability guidelines – WP:WHATABOUTISM is not an excuse. I have no issue with drafting, however "can be considered as a future prospect" is the definition of WP:CRYSTAL. MSportWiki (talk) 11:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I know nothing about this content area, but here are the sources I could locate: [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55]. I don't know how to evaluate content in this area which seems hyper specific to motor sports so I will leave it to others to determine whether this meets WP:SPORTSBASIC/WP:SIGCOV. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: She seems to have enough coverage for WP:GNG - have added 3 new refs which are not simply database results listings. PamD 11:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diahnne Abbott

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

Non-notable actress. Mainly famous for being the first wife of Robert De Niro, but notability is not inherited. Natg 19 (talk) 02:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and United States of America. Natg 19 (talk) 02:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:SIGCOV. She has an encyclopedia entry in Encyclopedia of African American Actresses in Film and Television, see page 4, and there are many other sources in this Internet Archive search; including another biographical entry in Halliwell's who's who in the movies which is a film encyclopedia. Under WP:5P1 we cover the same topics found in specialized encyclopedias, and since two published specialized encyclopedia cover this person we should too. Additionally, she had more significant roles in The King of Comedy and Love Streams, and she has a featured on screen song number in the film New York, New York, performing "Honeysuckle Rose (song)" (also appearing on the soundtrack album). She arguably passes WP:NACTRESS for multiple notable roles.4meter4 (talk) 02:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change

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

Fails WP:NCORP. No in-depth significant coverage of the organization. C F A 💬 20:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Environment, and Italy. C F A 💬 20:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am the head communication office at the Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change (CMCC). The Center is an international research center that collaborates in many international projects and initiatives, such as

-- the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that have selected us as the Focal point for Italy

-- the European Environment Agency for which we coordinate the European Topic Centre on Climate Change Aaptation and LULUCF (ETC CA)

-- we provide climate predictions and forecasts for Copernicus Climate Services and for Copernicus Marine Service

-- we have research collaborations with leading research centers around the world, the latest one is with Princeton University High Meadows Environmental Institute

We will add this information, other international relevant activities, and related sources to the page. I hope this is enough to maintain the article on Wikipedia. Buonocoremauro (talk) 10:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Buonocoremauro. Thanks for that info. Please take a look at the message to you and User:Manusantagata79 I am about to leave on the talk page of the article about some guidelines English Wikipedia has about Wikipedia:Conflict of interest which might seem strange to academics or might be different on Italian Wikipedia. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

Keep Although I would not be able to cite all the content I have added a couple of cites and should be able to find more if needed to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 07:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of the sources you added help with WP:NCORP notability. C F A 💬 15:27, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK I have now added ^[1]

I don’t speak Italian but hopefully someone from the Italy project can take a look Chidgk1 (talk) 16:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me, but that's one source. We'll need more than one to show notability. C F A 💬 16:06, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Il meglio della scienza del clima è al Cmcc". la Repubblica (in Italian). 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2024-11-11.

Weak keep I’m seeing a large number of climate science books and journal articles citing data/research generated by the CMCC internationally in examining EBSCOE, JSTOR, google books etc. There a lot of passing mentions of the organization in that kind of literature. While technically not enough to meet WP:NCORP this is a case where I think the topic is encyclopedic based on its broad scholarly impact along the reasoning at WP:NACADEMIC. Lastly, it’s possible there are foreign language sources not easily found in searching in English as this organization does research globally. I grant you that this is not the strongest argument, but international scope is covered in our WP:SNG at WP:NONPROFIT. I'm not really seeing any benefit in deleting an article on a government funded/founded climate research organization attached to multiple Italian universities.4meter4 (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NONPROFIT says Organizations are usually notable if ... The scope of their activities is national or international in scale. and The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization., but if this is an IAR keep I'm not going to debate it. C F A 💬 00:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 20:55, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperintensity

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

Is mostly a fork of White matter hyperintensity Bluethricecreamman (talk) 18:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:00, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:34, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. White matter hyperintensity is a redirect to Leukoaraiosis which is only one disease that has pathology involving Hyperintensity. Leukoencephalopathy, hypoxic brain injury, etc. also have T2 hyperintensity imaging results. Not really seeing a need to delete this as they are different by related topics with WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 19:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
hmm... saw Leukoaraiosis mostly talking about WMH, but you are right. I think its the a subcategory of WMH, so surprising it takes up the whole WMH redirect.
There is some weirdness happening here.
- Leukoaraiosis is a subcategory of WMH, and I think does not appear much often at all in literature (only 20k hits on google Scholar).
- WMH is the more widely used supercategory to define a presentation. (>100k hits on google scholar)
- Hyperintensity by itself does not mean much, just abnormal increase in intensity of something, this article is more about White matter hyperintensities.
I might be in favor of a merge Bluethricecreamman (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The overbolding of every other term in the first few paragraphs of hyperintensity definitely suggest a lack of focus for the page. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 20:20, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s more of a style issue which can be fixed (although redirected words should be bolded under MOS). Honestly I think it’s best to leave the article where it is because hyperintensity, while more common in white matter, can also occur in gray matter. Gray matter hyperintensity is associated with Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and can also be a sign of a stroke.4meter4 (talk) 03:19, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

those are fairly different clinical bases in general even if they show up similar in MRI.

a similar analogy would be high body temp… maybe its cuz person has a fever maybe they have heat stroke, but the measuring instrument says they have a very high temperature… even if there is a similar mechanism of the body overheating the underlying aspects are different enough they should not be combined into a single wikipedia article Bluethricecreamman (talk) 05:13, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undoubtedly there’s different clinical causes between hyperintensity appearing in gray matter versus white matter, but that’s not really relevant to what is essentially an article on an imaging term. Hyperintensity on an MRI scan is hyperintensity on an MRI scan no matter where it happens in terms of the kind of tissue it presents in. It seems to me you are confusing an imaging reading term used for diagnostic analysis with the pathophysiology of the diseases often associated with the imaging term. They are related but separate.4meter4 (talk) 11:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 20:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Illinois Farm Bureau

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

WP:BEFORE reveals no ostensible notability. Article is almost exclusively unsourced and written by the organization themselves (user 'Ilfb1916' clearly violates WP:ISU and implies this is the subject itself), being functionally a billboard instead of a resource with any encyclopedic merit. IP editor who removed PROD did so under the justification of "Useful links and relevance due to member and partner organizations", but this is complete nonsense as it pertains to notability. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Illinois. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this is an interesting kettle of fish. On the one hand, we would presumably have a clear example of what WP:BRANCH was intended for; failing to find sources outside of the branch unit's area of operation, we would redirect to the parent organization. On the other hand, on this very day the American Farm Bureau Federation kicked the Illinois Farm Bureau out of the federation over a membership/business dispute, and as of December the state bureau will not have a parent organization, litigation and backroom dealing pending. I don't see any WP:SIGCOV of the organization in non-WP:TRADES publications separate from this dispute, and that coverage is all in agricultural trade publications and local news outlets in small Illinois markets. In the absence of an WP:NORG pass and without an appropriate WP:BRANCH redirect target, I'd have to !vote delete. Open to an WP:IAR redirect to American Farm Bureau Federation too. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Uh... Wow. I was not expecting this to take that direction. The WP:BEFORE I'd done for this organization was two days ago, so this wasn't even on my radar when I nominated it. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. According to the NPR story given already above the IFB is the largest insurer of farms in the state of Illinois. It's a significant company with a lengthy history. There is significant coverage in the following including a book about the company:

Nancy K. Berlage. "Organizing the Farm Bureau: Family, Community, and Professionals, 1914-1928" Agricultural History, Vol. 75, No. 4 (Autumn, 2001), pp. 406-437 (32 pages) https://www.jstor.org/stable/3745183
Farmers Helping Farmers: The Rise of the Farm and Home Bureaus, 1914-1935 (2016, Louisiana State University Press)
Dan Leifel and Norma Haney. The Diamond Harvest: A History of the Illinois Farm Bureau (Bloomington: Illinois Agricultural Association, 1990).
Cynthia Clampitt. Mid- west Maize: How Corn Shaped the U.S. Heartland (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2015).
Additionally JSTOR has 240 hits when searching on the "Illinois Farm Bureau" and there are more than 9,000 hits in PROQUEST with lots of SIGCOV news coverage across many decades. Sourcing and WP:ORGCRIT is not an issue here. Best.4meter4 (talk) 05:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts on these sources:

The first two (the Agricultural History article and the LSU Press book) are both by the same author, Nancy Berlage. Collectively these would count as one source (since they are not intellectually independent of each other).
Dan Leifel and Norma Maney both worked for the Illinois Farm Bureau for decades, Leifel as general counsel and Maney as an executive assistant. Their history of the IFB cannot be considered an independent source.
Can you point to what in the Clampitt book refers to the Illinois Farm Bureau? I can't access the text but the snippets available via Google Books indicate it's only index mentions, not WP:SIGCOV. Would be happy to be proven wrong if you can share how Clampitt discusses the subject. (If it was pulled from this Illinois historiography article, it's clear the author is talking about the Maney and Leifel book, not saying Clampitt covered the IFB in her book: Agriculture remains a critical part of the Illinois economy. A recent centennial history of the Illinois Farm Bureau offers a broad look at state agriculture including the post World War II period. Cynthia Clampitt wrote a history of midwestern corn production that includes work on Illinois.)
The "NPR" story I linked above is actually a local radio story from an NPR affiliate and doesn't pass the WP:AUD test.
I paged through many of the JSTOR listings and didn't find any additional WP:SIGCOV. Apart from the Berlage article above, they all appear to be WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS.

Based on this analysis, I see only one WP:SIRS source to pass WP:NORG. Open to reviewing more if you can supply additional examples. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Trump Economic Miracle

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

Book's been out for a month, no independent reviews or coverage beyond summarizing what the book says. I would suggest redirection to the author but there are two, so that's out. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Politics. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is draftify not an option? There may be opportunities to improve this article in the future if independent reviews are forthcoming. Reconrabbit 02:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, with books like this if it hasn't gotten reviews by now I would be surprised if it did, so at that point it just just seems like a backdoor deletion. But sure if that's the route people want to go. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Draftify - not separately notable or not detailed enough. There might be another article suitable to merge it in to though.
Sushidude21! (talk) 07:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I would have said "draftify", but I can see a back and forth on perspectives of this book. It's been talked about by news talking heads, as far back as September. In fact, the closer to the election, the more we heard about how Trump's pro-growth policies "fueled unprecedented growth and prosperity". The news media viewed this book according to however they already viewed Trump. That aspect is unlikely to change. But I'm not sure Wikipedia needs an article on it. — Maile (talk) 03:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. No objection to someone working on this in draft space provided it go through draft review successfully before being moved back to main space. Reviews in business journals (by that I mean academic ones we can use not trade journals) might still happen, as those kind of reviews often appear later. It may end up dying in draft space if refs can’t be located and that is ok.4meter4 (talk) 03:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Conservatism, Economics, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Domain authority

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

Aazingly outdated article for something that seems at core to be based on one company's ("Moz") proprietary product.

The article ttself makes this clear:

"The software as a service company Moz.org has developed an algorithm and weighted level metric, branded as "Domain Authority", which gives predictions on a website's performance in search engine rankings with a discriminating range from 0 to 100".

Search doesn't work this way any more, and almost all the references cited are incredibly outdated; the thing described doesn't really exist any more, algorithms have moved on. There is probably an article to be written on site reputation, but this isn't it. — The Anome (talk) 00:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural close per WP:WRONGFORUM. I don’t think this is something we can handle at AFD because it requires expert opinion and original analysis based on expertise rather than an evaluation of sources based on WP:N or WP:Deletion policy. It is essentially a content decision more akin to a content dispute than to notability issue. I would suggest working with editors on the talk page and discussing how to handle this or contacting a relevant WikiProject to enlist editors on reworking or repurposing the article. A move discussion might be in order at that time to your suggestion of site reputation. I don’t think AFD is the right pathway to address these issues. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Etty Lau Farrell

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG, article is a biography of a person whose biggest claim to fame is being married to a notable musician. Sources presented are articles on Perry Farrell and Jane's Addiction (more than a few of which don't even mention Etty at all), primary interviews, passing mentions, etc. The sources with the most dedicated coverage to her here are a Forbes contributor article and a Wordpress blog (neither of which are in any way acceptable for BLP articles, see WP:FORBESCON and WP:WORDPRESS), virtually none of the others establish notability. Given the WP:BLP problems at play here, including numerous sections of unsourced content about the living subject, as well as the aforementioned WP:SIGCOV issues (which WP:BEFORE could not help alleviate, since most of the standalone coverage that a search could turn up is about her commentary on a single controversy from around the same period), this person is unworthy of an article. JeffSpaceman (talk) 00:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Perry Farrell#personal life per WP:ATD. The only sourcing I could find were all WP:TABLOID articles.4meter4 (talk) 04:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Dance, Television, Hong Kong, California, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Wily

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

This has been redirected because it relies heavily on primary sources and the nominator's WP:BEFORE found nothing but game reviews, but i am here to give this article a second chance, Wily is a pretty popular character, it has been a year and a half since it was redirected, so doing a WP:BEFORE should find some reliable sources as a keep, but if not, we can restore the merge and redirect. Toby2023 (talk) 00:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restore Redirect and procedural close per WP:G4. This is the exact same article we looked at last time (zero alterations) and this is an abuse of process. It’s not AFD’s job to source hunt in this context, and the nominator didn’t even bother to suggest what these new sources are in asking for us to look at this again. If you want to work on it, do so in WP:USERSPACE by copy pasting the article into your WP:SANDBOX. When you have located new sources and then improved the article to a state where you think it meets WP:GNG undo the the redirect and make it live per WP:BOLD. If people disagree it may end back here at WP:AFD. At which point we will either confirm your opinion or reinstate the redirect. Don’t ask us to relook at anything that hasn’t changed since the last time we looked at it. Best.4meter4 (talk) 04:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Request Could someone please link the discussion leading to this becoming a redirect, because I cannot see it? Daranios (talk) 11:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "Aruba Mirza calls herself 'Papa ki pari'". ARY News. 24 July 2023.

[2] "Voters declare Aruba Mirza winner of 'Tamasha Season 2'". The Express Tribune.

[3] "Il meglio della scienza del clima è al Cmcc". la Repubblica (in Italian). 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2024-11-11.

[1]

[2]

[1]