Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

22 January 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< January 21	January 23 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Weidner Communications

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

This article is confusing. Is it about a marketing company, a machine translation software, or the brothers (who have last names spelled differently)? 🄻 🄰 11:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Language, Companies, Technology, and Software. 🄻 🄰 11:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@लॉस एंजिल्स लेखक: I can't identify a deletion rationale in your nomination statement. Could you please provide one, else this nomination should be closed under WP:CSK#1. This appears to be a reasonably sourced article on a company, the machine translation software it produced, and its founders, which appear to be a reasonable set of topics to cover together. ~ A412 ^talk! 16:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Speedy keep~~ per WP:CSK#1 (nom has been editing, but has not provided any deletion rationale). ~ A412 ^talk! 18:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to open a discussion on this article because I don't think the company is notable, everything I can find about "Weidner Communications" seems to point back to this article. Note also the varying spelling of Weidner and Wydner.

In the entire article, this is the portion about the company called "Weidner Communications":

"During the mid-1980s Weidner Communications, Inc., (WCC), was the largest translation company by sales volume in the United States. (Margaret M. Perscheid, 1985) Later the Japanese sold Wydner's technology to Intergraph Corporation of Alabama who later sold it to Transparent Language, Inc. of New Hampshire. Bruce Wydner, the principal agent for the Inns of the Temple Inc., that retained the research and development rights to the Weidner Multi-lingual Word Processor, separated himself from his brother in early 1979 and no longer supplied any updated software developments. Weidner had offended his brother over a matter of having Eyring Research Institute send their bi-lingual employee to remove Wydners intellectual property from his home, of which Wydner claims was stolen from him."

Everything else is about the software which mentions "Translation Associates" "Bravis International" "Eyring Research Institute" "Transparent Language, Inc." "Intergraph Corporation of Alabama" as all owning it.

My rationale is that the article as it is currently written does not seem to be primarily about "Weidner Communications" and Weidner Communications itself seems to be a non-notable company that was one of 6+ to have something to do with the software. 🄻 🄰 13:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I think there's a notable topic somewhere in here, although maybe not at the current title. Let me look around for other sources, because I largely can't figure out what the current article is actually citing. ~ A412 ^talk! 20:08, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to weak keep and move to Weidner Multi-Lingual Word Processing System. NY Times, InfoWorld, Inc, small mention in a translation technology encyclopedia, small mention in an excerpt from a language science history text. ~ A412 ^talk! 20:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While the nomination qualified for a speedy keep, lacking valid deletion reason, a subsequent comment by the nom provides the missing rationale.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT and WP:NCORP. I think the nomination by a relative newcomer here wasn't clearly stated. This is my whispering: It's so confusing a page that it would need to be deleted and started over again from scratch. The subject itself is not clearly notable; much of the content is sourced to (parenthetical primary sources like this). The creator of the page made their last edit almost 7 years ago, and apparently has left, so we can't ask for clarification. Is that correct? Bearian (talk) 07:39, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that is what I meant. If the software is notable a new article would be better than trying to edit this one. 🄻 🄰 20:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm still not clear on the arguments for deletion. If the subject fails NCORP, what is the point of starting from scratch? And if it meets NCORP, any editor may blank the current page and start from scratch without the aid of the Delete button, or simply reduce the article to a well-sourced stub. An assessment of the sources presented here would help.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Berger (disambiguation)

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

Per WP:2DABS and WP:PARTIAL. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Disambiguations. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bongkosh Rittichainuwat

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

Doesn't have enough references to prove notability. Borderline, but still lacking as an academic administrator. Awards don't have any references, including the poetry chanting award. Qylt (talk) 19:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Travel and tourism, and Thailand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yhing Sawheny

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

They fails according to Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Doesn't have any reliable sources or any concerning academic values. A staff member of the university doesn't seem reliable or notable. Qylt (talk) 19:30, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Thailand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:19, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2028 ICC Women's T20 World Cup

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

WP:TOOSOON. The 2026 edition is yet to be played. No WP:SIGCOV for this event. This article could be recreated at a later date with more information and sources. QEnigma talk 19:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. QEnigma talk 19:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete or redirect, WP:A10 duplicate of the article 2028 Women's T20 World Cup, but with ICC added. - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 19:49, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Pakistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:19, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of wars involving South Yemen

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

Quite the same reason as of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of wars involving North Yemen. A WP:REDUNDANTFORK and an unwarranted WP:SPLIT with no consensus at Talk:List of wars involving Yemen. Garuda ^Talk! 19:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Islam, Lists, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Russia, and Cuba. Garuda ^Talk! 19:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Kingdom and Middle East. Garuda ^Talk! 19:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Garuda ^Talk! 19:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Historical country. Merging with List of wars involving Yemen makes a statement on the ongoing secessionist conflict ("South Yemen = Yemen"). Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 19:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to merge there, I didn't even call for that. The only thing I'd suggest is gaining consensus to WP:PROSPLIT the List of wars involving Yemen Garuda ^Talk! 19:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chetak helicopter crash at INS Garuda

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

An unnotable and routine accident. No significant coverage and no lasting effects. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 19:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Aviation, and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and India. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 20:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First Anglo–Bengal War

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

Another mess of WP:OR & WP:SYNTH, Fails WP:GNG. None of the sources mentions the event as “First Anglo–Bengal War”, The article heavily replies on copied content from Black Hole of Calcutta, Siege of Calcutta and Treaty of Alinagar. Koshuri Sultan (talk) 18:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Bangladesh, India, Europe, and United Kingdom. Koshuri Sultan (talk) 18:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shams–Woj rivalry

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

Odd that this article has remained on Wikipedia Since September 2023. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Novemberjazz 18:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Basketball, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gyatt (disambiguation)

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

Yesterday I proposed this "article" for deletion, with the following reason given:
As far as I'm aware, the word "gyatt" only has two uses, the one outlaid (outlayed?) in gyatt, as well as the name of the US Navy ship named after Edward Earl Gyatt. Since no other articles link to this page, it doesn't serve a purpose, and should therefore be deleted. In other words; the continued existence of this article is only warranted if the polysemousness of the word "gyatt" is expected to increase, which I deem unlikely.

A few hours ago someone removed said proposal for the following reason:
"removed PROD: this seems a correct dab page, that can also pop up in search"

In my opinion, this doesn't really address the issue. The only thing that warrants the continued existence is that it pop up on search? Of course it pops up in search. Instead, one could just click on the "primary" Gyatt article, which also links to the USS Gyatt page.

From primary topic with only one other topic:
"If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed—it is sufficient to use a hatnote on the primary topic article, pointing to the other article. (This means that readers looking for the second topic are spared the extra navigational step of going through the disambiguation page.)

If an existing disambiguation page does not appear to be needed because there are only two topics for the ambiguous title and one of them is the primary topic, but there could reasonably be other topics ambiguous with the title on Wikipedia now or in the future[1], an {{about}} hatnote can be used to link to a disambiguation page (either in addition to or instead of a link directly to the other article)."
(emphasis mine)

[1]: I'm don't see the disambiguation page in question expanding in the near future due to the "unusual" nature of the word gyatt.

It's think it's pretty clear that this "article"/page can be deleted.

J. Geerink (talk) 17:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:23, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RBG PAC

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

Length does not justify an article. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep, on procedural grounds as no policy or guideline based deletion argument has been made. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:23, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Francisco San Martin

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

Page fails to meet notability for living persons, via verifiability or even meeting notability for people; page was previously deleted in 2011 for the same reasons. Being a recent death does not equate to notability a decade later. livelikemusic (TALK!) 18:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. livelikemusic (TALK!) 18:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gundam Universal Century technology

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

Article previously went through AfD in 2009, although I can't say I agree with the outcome; the article is basically unchanged since then in regards to secondary sourcing, and I don't think any rise to the level of significant (I also don't think most are actually secondary, but there's so little bibliographic details I can't be sure.) This remains a coatrack of in-universe minutiae that belongs on a Gundam wiki, not here. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, Anime and manga, Technology, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Çınarköy, Çüngüş

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

I cannot find any proof this place exists Chidgk1 (talk) 18:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm seeing plenty of sources in Google Books mentioning the village. Such as this and this. There's a bunch of census books that have it listed. It's similarly listed in this government document. Silver seren^C 18:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ulukent railway station

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

The Turkish article does not have good enough cites to show that this station is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 18:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pala invasion of Hunas

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

Full of WP:OR & WP:SYNTH. The article fails WP:N and WP:GNG & has poor sources which fails verification. The lead mentions that this invasion was led by Devapala & his son Mahendrapala (the cited source does not mention it) however the rest of the article only mentions Devapala. None of the sources refer this event as “Pala invasion of Hunas”. Conflict with kambojas is synthesized in the conflict section too. Koshuri Sultan (talk) 18:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Afghanistan, and India. Koshuri Sultan (talk) 18:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Recently an article created by the author was deleted for being an HOAX, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander's invasion of Gangaridai. Koshuri Sultan (talk) 18:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Koshuri Sultan (talk) 18:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Küçükköyspor

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

Having just one external link is not enough to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 17:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:27, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hatundere railway station

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

The Turkish article only has primary sources and does not explain how it is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 17:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:27, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Schäfer

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

WP:BLP of a writer and unelected political candidate, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for writers or politicians. As always, writers are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because their books exist, and unelected candidates do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates: the notability test for politicians is holding a notable office, not just running for one, and the notability test for writers is the reception of third-party attention being paid to their books, such as literary awards and reviews by professional literary critics in WP:GNG-worthy real media.
But this just states that he exists, and sources its content entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability, with absolutely no evidence of GNG-worthy coverage or analysis about his work.
It also warrants note that even though he's German, and thus an article on the German Wikipedia would be expected to exist if he were genuinely notable enough for Wikipedia, the only interlang actually present here is in Portuguese, and cites absolutely no GNG-worthy sourcing that could be moved over here to salvage this either -- while even the Wikidata entry suggests that attempts to create articles about him in the Spanish and Romanian Wikipedias have previously been deleted on those Wikipedias for notability reasons, whereas no article about him has ever existed in the German Wikipedia at all. So even the Portuguese article exists only because the Portuguese administrators haven't caught and deleted it yet, rather than because he's got any kind of genuine claim to notability. (Does anybody here have enough Portuguese to take it to their AFD?)
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a stronger notability claim and better sourcing for it than this. Bearcat (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Politicians, and Germany. Bearcat (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Egekent railway station

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

There is only one secondary source in the Turkish article and that is not specifically about this station Chidgk1 (talk) 17:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:27, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Armen Miran

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

Promotional article for a non-notable DJ; fails WP:NMUSIC, WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. Contested draftification, so AfD it is. Quick review of sources:

Podcasts and other Q&A WP:INTERVIEWs and thus WP:PRIMARYSOURCES: [1], [2], [3].
Promotional copy/video for shows: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9].
Sponsored content/press releases and thus non-WP:INDEPENDENT coverage: [10], [11].
WP:USERGENERATED source: [12].
WP:PRIMARYSOURCE / non-independent official bios: [13], [14], [15].

A WP:BEFORE search turns up more of the same but nothing qualifying for WP:GNG or any other guideline. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Iran, and California. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The subject had a major feature, including as the cover star, in the January 2024 issue of Mixmag-brasil - Armen Miran, when the mysticism meets the sound of an ethereal world. Mixmag is independent and reliable per WP:RSMUSIC, and shows potential for meeting MUSICIO, but it's not quite sufficient on it's own however.... ResonantDis_tortion 18:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Scroll down... it's actually a Q&A interview, not a profile, and thus a primary and non-independent source since the subject is discussing himself. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is a curated interview in a reliable source that has a multi-paragraph introduction under a journalistic byline. That intro alone is non-trivial analytic coverage per WP:MUSICBIO#1, notwithstanding the curated questions which include further analysis such as "You are well-known for delivering ethereal journeys, sophisticated beats, and tons of dreamlike progressions". WP:INTERVIEW, which you cited above, states interviews "can be considered as evidence of notability"; this includes "selecting the subject, contacting the subject, preparation of questions, and writing supplemental material such as a biography". Mixmag, one of the biggest reliable sources in the DJ world, has seen fit to have a front page feature and curated interview, including a short bio, about the subject. Anyhow - this is all academic unless other sources turn up. ResonantDis_tortion 19:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If I ever open an interview with You are well-known for delivering ethereal journeys, sophisticated beats, and tons of dreamlike progressions, that's how you'll know I'm a neutral, independent observer of my subject :) Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you can utter that phrase with a straight face, I'll know you should be deified :) ResonantDis_tortion 19:59, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Atrium, Cardiff

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

Few independent third party sources on the page. Little to indicate that a university building should be considered notable. JMWt (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Wales. JMWt (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Academies

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

Non notable academy, fails WP:NORG a before shows no independent coverage. Theroadislong (talk) 13:02, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Schools, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep = star academies is an outstanding organisation, and the entry needs to be beefed up, not deleted. It is interesting because it was once a Muslim school chain (TIGS etc) and Hamid has made it broader and secular. Lots of dimensions of interest 80.6.86.18 (talk) 22:13, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I have not generally found that MATs meet GNG, but in this case I think it does. Have added coverage under both the organisation's current name and its former one. Tacyarg (talk) 23:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tajimul Islam

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

Should be deleted per WP:CRIMINAL, article is solely about alleged crimes. Fram (talk) 14:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - Egregious WP:BLP violation among other things. Lard Almighty (talk) 15:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Crime, India, and West Bengal. Fram (talk) 14:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per WP:PERP, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for being accused of crimes — he would have to be convicted of a crime before that became possible grounds for an article, and even then the crime would still have to be of enduring significance in some way that would pass the "will people still care about this ten years from now" test. We're writing history here, not news. But the article, as written, fails to state that he ever held any office that would hand him a free pass over WP:NPOL, so it can't be kept just because the article calls him a politician either. Bearcat (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A P Varkey Mission Hospital, Arakkunnam

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

No notability per NCORP. I couldn't find any sources with SIGCOV and the sources available are either promotional or primary. I had CSDed it an year ago, but it was declined per claims present eg inaugurated by two major politicians. But since the hospital is owned and run by the ruling party, it is not uncommon for the politicians to present for the inauguration, which is not a criteria indicating notability. — Benison (Beni · talk) 14:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, India, and Kerala. — Benison (Beni · talk) 14:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DWHL

AfDs for this article:

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

Radio station. Deleted in 2016 via AfD for non-notability. Recreated in 2019 by a now-permablocked user. Notability is still not apparent. We have one blog source and one very weird-looking government website cited as sources. I don't think that this suffices in view of WP:GNG. Sandstein 13:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 13:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:29, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tobacco Landing, Indiana

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

It'd easy to find references to the ferry, and there are many hits for a project to determine elevations along the river, but what I'm not seeing is any sign that there was anything here except a ramp down to the water an maybe a shed for a toll keeper. I don't see anything that says this was anything beside where the ferry landed on the Indiana side. Mangoe (talk) 13:29, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United States of America and Indiana. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 14:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:30, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wesean Student Federation

AfDs for this article:

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

notability KabirDH (talk) 12:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, this fails to meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria. Without significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, the article does not meet the standard for inclusion. Chegouahora (talk) 13:02, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

— Chegouahora (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Fraternities and sororities, Bangladesh, Myanmar, and India. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: The article violates Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View (NPOV) and Verifiability policies. There are multiple Extreme POVs trying to link the group with insurgents by using “seemingly” valid reliable sources, but these have nothing to do with how the term is used by the organisation itself. Stating this the Etymology section is excessive and unsupported by reliable sources discussing the term in the context of the organization, violating WP:UNDUE. Also Newspaper sources merely repeating the organization’s claims do not meet WP:RS standards as independent, third-party references. I don’t feel the lyngdoh paper is reliable as it’s written by a high schooler and newspaper articles mostly just repeat what the organisation has said. So this article needs to be further cut down and taking all the sources into account I don’t feel it will should be more than 1-2 paragraphs long ZoUnified (talk) 18:02, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a separate discussion happening regarding the undue weight on the Talk page, and a possible RfC if additional edit warring occurs. The POV issues can be resolved without deletion/draftifying EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 01:12, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: All the sources listed are Third Party and Reliable. There is also considerable coverage on the organisation that would support keeping the Wikipedia article on it. Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 14:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: there's at least one article on the page that meets WP:GNG as an independent secondary source and WP:SIGCOV from other sources. The Lyngdoh source, the currently used Haokip source and the Mokokchung times source would each, by themselves, fulfill GNG. By policy, this article's content may need better verifiability but clearly meets standards for inclusion as an article.

As an outsider to WP:INDIA, I've additionally observed bludgeoning with citation tags that have been mostly resolved as well as a lot of wishywashy claims of a lack of notability over the last day. If these stem from an objection to the WP:POV views on the term Wesea, wikipedia is not censored and it's merely an uncomfortable fact that Wesea is in the organisation's name. All of this is, of course, irrelevant to this AfD but is perhaps relevant context to consider given that the nominee did not explain at all what their concerns are. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 14:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fringe topic SN bastion (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

— SN bastion (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I am very surprised that there is this much coverage for a student group founded less than a year ago, but the sources narrowly get it over the line IMO. The best by far is the Haokip article, which seems to be a proper peer-reviewed journal article focused entirely on this group. The other sources are much less convincing. The Lyngdoh source is by a high school student and I'm sceptical that the site is a WP:RS. The other sources, including the Mokokchung Times, EastMojo, Shillong Times, and Hub Network pieces, don't have bylined reporters and seem to essentially repeat the group's announcements, so I think they should be discounted somewhat. But the Khasi language source is good, and the sources I can find make me strongly suspect there is much more out there in little-spoken northeast Indian languages that I'm just not able to find. I would also note that this group split off from Northeast Students' Organization, which seems to be unambiguously notable. So at worst I think this is potentially a case of WP:TOOSOON. MCE89 (talk) 02:44, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article clearly meets the inclusion criteria, contrary to the nominator's claim. The sources cited such as Lyngdoh,Haokip, Mokokchung Times and the Morung Express article strongly support the article's compliance with WP:GNG.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 08:29, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus is edging towards a keep since the opposing arguments are made by users who barely edited anything else. Nonetheless, a little more input from the community is appreciated for a clear cut consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 12:55, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there's enough here to satisfy WP:GNG in my opinion.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stephan Kuhl

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

Mass-created article by Lugnuts. On the same day they created this article, they created at least 63 others (some will have been deleted in the meantime). Fails WP:NSPORTS. Prod declined on the grounds that an interview on the German Badminton Federation website (i.e., clearly not an independent RS), talks about media exposure, but since the subject was a commentator on TV for a short period that's probably what they were talking about, not actual media coverage of them per se. Nothing found in my WP:BEFORE. FOARP (talk) 11:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. FOARP (talk) 11:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Badminton, Olympics, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The relevant part of the interview under question is the following: [Interviewer]: Would you say that there was a kind of badminton boom in Germany as a result of its inclusion in the Olympics? [Kuhl]: In the short term, I would say. We had a lot of media attention at the time. I had to fulfill more requests for autographs than ever before. But after six months, that was over... According to that article, he was a four-time German champion and he was also a bronze medalist at the European championship, and after his career he coached the women's national team. Further, Germany is a decent badminton-ing nation with a global ranking in the top 15. I think its almost certain there'd be coverage of him, especially since he's being interviewed by the national association decades after his career (even if its an interview, it shows that he was prominent enough that there's still interest in his career, which would indicate that there was surely interest – and coverage – back when he was active). The coverage would likely be in German newspapers of the time – has any German newspaper archive been searched? BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"We" doesn't mean "he". I searched what was available online. Clearly no such database was searched when this article was created, and it is on those wishing to keep the article to find such sourcing. Only a single hit on the FAZ archive - a passing mention in a report about the pair Karen Stechmann and Michael Keck. Not sigcov. FOARP (talk) 10:04, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But when he says We, referring to German badminton players in general, and he was the top German badminton player from the time (or, at the very least, one of the top four), would it make any sense at all that there wouldn't be coverage of him? Why would a governing body for a major German sport interview him decades after his career if he was such an insignificant figure that not even a single newspaper devoted coverage to him? As for FAZ, that I can find more passing mentions of him in American newspapers seems to indicate that the FAZ archive isn't very comprehensive – If we had a Newspapers.com-like site for Germany I'm certain that there'd be SIGCOV to find of him. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:28, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FAZ is the biggest German broadsheet and German newspaper of record. You're asserting the existence of something that doesn't necessarily exist based on an over-interpretation of a single phrase in an interview with something that isn't even proper news-media decades after the event.

It's for the people asserting that there is significant coverage to go and find the coverage, not ask that people should just take it on trust, especially considering the history of the article-creator. Alternatively WP:BEFORE searching has to be proportionate to the effort put in to substantiating the notability fo the topic when it was created. In this case the effort put in by the article-creator was patently near-zero - it was created in mere minutes, if that. FOARP (talk) 20:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FAZ may be the biggest German newspaper, but saying Kuhl's confirmed non-notable by the basis of searching one newspaper is equivalent to saying that someone is non-notable because they weren't covered in The New York Times. It only makes sense that if a player says that his sport received a good deal of coverage, and that player was the best player in that sport, that that player would have received coverage (who else would be receiving coverage then to justify that statement?). I think that a governing body interviewing him decades after his career would indicate significance; if he was some no-name that not even a single newspaper would give coverage to, why would the governing body cover the person decades later? Do you think its likely that someone who was a four-time German champion in a major sport, as well as a bronze medalist at the continental championships, would not be covered somewhere? As for Alternatively WP:BEFORE searching has to be proportionate to the effort put in to substantiating the notability fo [sic] the topic when it was created, no it doesn't. Would you say then that it was inappropriate behavior that I've developed several of Lugnuts' stubs into GAs, some after they were AFDed? More importantly, I was able to find a source that mentioned his email, so I contacted him and hopefully he can respond if he's been the subject of any coverage in the past. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:18, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did not only search one news paper. I searched the archives of every paper indexed by Google AND the FAZ archive. That's more than enough for an article that Lugnuts through together in a minute or less from a database listing.

If you want this article to be kept, then find sources. WP:BURDEN is clear on this. FOARP (talk) 17:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How many German newspapers from the early 1990s are available through Google? BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please also look to the German article were there is more information about how good he was. He played on the highest level for quite some time it seems. Themanwithnowifi (talk) 20:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's all the same statistical data: WP:SIGCOV is needed per WP:NSPORTS. FOARP (talk) 22:37, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It also states for badminton that if he won or has a podium finish on one of the World Grand Prix sigcov is likely to exist, he won the Swiss Open in 1990. Which means that we can assume with certainty that sigcov would exist per WP:NSPORTS section about badminton. Themanwithnowifi (talk) 05:51, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He and his partner won the men’s doubles in the 1990 Swiss open (which, note, was not part of the Grand Prix circuit at the time, since this was only created in 2007), not him personally. It also says the article has to eventually pass GNG, which this doesn’t because, as is very clear after all this discussion, none of you can find anything in terms of SIGCOV and neither can I. Here’s the Swiss newspaper archive results for Stephan Kuhl, here's Der Spiegel, here's the Internet Archive's results (which covers a number of German publications) for Stephan Kuhl. 1990 was not very long ago as these things go, nor is German some obscure language just waiting to be archived properly - there’s just no “there” there. FOARP (talk) 07:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While I agree that, in theory, a four-time German badminton champion should be notable, the GNG-level sources simply are not there. The best sources are the two badminton.de links in the article, neither of which constitutes sigcov. Toadspike [Talk] 10:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 12:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shyam Metalics and Energy

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and West Bengal. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence that this company is notable, or is little more than a holding company. Bearian (talk) 07:57, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with deleting the Shyam Metalics page. Instead, I propose marking it as a stub, indicating it requires expansion and improvement.

Shyam Metalics is a significant player in the Indian steel industry, and its presence on Wikipedia provides valuable information. Deleting the page would deprive readers of this information.

It is a Fortune India 500 company. Deleting the page would be unjustified; it should be retained and improved to reflect its industry importance. 115.187.51.153 (talk) 04:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IdeaForge

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, India, and Maharashtra. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 09:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There is sufficient coverage such as Livemint, MoneyControl etc. Drushrush (talk) 06:51, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trivial coverage WP:ORGTRIV, these news stories are about changes in stock prices. Not sufficient enough. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 12:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inner West Bulls

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

Redirect to NBL1 East as I am unable to find any WP:SIGCOV for this semi-pro basketball team. JTtheOG (talk) 06:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and Australia. JTtheOG (talk) 06:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 12:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ram Krishna Bantawa

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV as per Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!}. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Hong Kong, and Nepal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rahmatula786,

I hope this message finds you well.

Thank you for raising concerns about the article on Ram Krishna Bantawa. I firmly believe the article meets the requirements outlined in Wikipedia’s WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV guidelines. Below is an explanation supporting this assertion:

Notability as an Author (WP:NAUTHOR):

Ram Krishna Bantawa is a recognized author and lyricist in Nepali literature. He is known for his novel Saghan Tuwanlo (Shrill Mist) and novel Amalai Chithi (Letter to Mother-whose English translation is forthcoming.) His work has made a significant cultural impact, particularly within the Nepali community.
His lyrics and songs are available on platforms such as YouTube.
Saghan Tuwanlo is included in the curriculum of Tribhuvan University, highlighting its academic and cultural significance.His novels address meaningful societal issues such as women’s rights, untouchability, and Sati Pratha (the practice of widow immolation), further emphasizing his contributions to literature and social discourse.

Significant Coverage (WP:SIGCOV):

Independent and reliable media outlets, including Kantipur, Annapurna Post, and various Hong Kong-based Nepali newspapers, have provided coverage of Bantawa’s work. This demonstrates his influence in Nepali literature and music.
He has been featured in interviews and podcasts that delve into his life, literary contributions, and societal impact, providing further evidence of significant independent coverage.
Bantawa has received several awards and certificates from reputable organizations, including:Nepalese Literary Academy Hong Kong , Heavenly Path Hong Kong , Charu Sahitya Pratisthan , Hong Kong Nepalese Federation , Lyricist Association of Nepal

The article references independent and verifiable sources that discuss Ram Krishna Bantawa’s work in detail. Taken collectively, these factors satisfy the standards for inclusion in Wikipedia under WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV.

If additional information or sources are required to further support this assertion and enhance the article, I would be happy to assist.

Best regards, Rasilshrestha (talk) 09:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel you know the person very well so you are aware of so many information. When i search on internet , I hardly find anything of significance covered in reputable media outlet about him .

regarding references, plz go through all the references, and let me know if a single source in reputable Nepali media from NPOV meeting WP criteria. If your have such sources plz put it here other than what you have kept in references. Plz note that sources in reference are not of significance. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rahmatula786,

Thank you for your message. I want to clarify that I do not personally know the person. The information I’ve provided is based solely on my research.

I understand your concerns regarding the importance of meeting Wikipedia's notability criteria. Unfortunately, there is limited online information due to the lack of archived articles in Nepali media. However, I have collected pictures of old newspaper articles about the author, including coverage from Nepali Hong Kong newspapers during a book launch press meet.

I believe the article is written from a neutral point of view. While I cannot attach the offline sources here, I’d be happy to share them via email. Additionally, I can provide relevant YouTube(https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Ram+Krishna+Bantawa) links of his Songs, Interviews. Please let me know how you’d like to proceed.

I look forward to your guidance and support, as I am currently gathering resources and information for my next article of Nepali Singer "Kuma Sagar" . Your insights will be invaluable in helping me refine my work. Please let me know how best to proceed.

Best Regards, Rasilshrestha (talk) 07:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia's guidelines, contributors are discouraged from writing about individuals they personally know to maintain neutrality and avoid conflicts of interest. I can assure you that I have no personal connection with, nor do I know, the author.

In my case, I refrained from including details about the author's awards and certificates, as I was unsure about their accuracy and could not verify them through reliable sources all i had were photographs of certificates and some mentions in newspapers. However, I conducted thorough research and included information about the author's books, song lyrics, and album, as these are well-documented and publicly available.

I can provide you with ISBN of the books they were published through Sajha Publications and ASIA 2000 Ltd. Also you can search in youtube for his songs and interviews. I can additionally provide you with offline sources(Newspaper Articles, Magazines) relating to the author. Rasilshrestha (talk) 15:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there appears to be some sourcing not available easily online (the "surface" of the Internet). I'm going for a dive. Bearian (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I searched under three different names for this author and his book, Shrill Mist. I also reached out to a Nepalese friend. I've come up with zero reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 02:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

Thank you for letting me know.I am actively working on gathering reliable links and additional information to support it. I’ll share them in refrence of the article.

The reason your friend might not have found information about the novel could be because it is an older work, first published in 2008. The author is not as widely recognized as prominent Nepali literary figures like Parijat, Laxmi Prasad Devkota, or Bhanubhakta Acharya, whose biographies are included in school curriculum. Additionally, the novel hasn’t been published online, limiting its accessibility to a broader audience. However, I’ve heard that the author’s new book is being published or translated into English, which might bring more attention to their work.

It’s also worth noting that the author has spent a significant amount of time outside Nepal, particularly in Hong Kong. If you search for his name on YouTube, you’ll find his songs, which might provide some additional context.

For now, I can provide the ISBN number of the book or any other available details. I’m actively working on finding more reliable sources and digging through news archives to provide further information Rasilshrestha (talk) 03:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My friend is old, like me, represents Nepal to Worec, and reads voraciously. Bearian (talk) 13:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I have posted the photos of news archive i have clicked (Ram Krishna Bantawa News Articles : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive) in archive.org Rasilshrestha (talk) 17:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the link to external site as Ram Krishna Bantawa News Archive. Rasilshrestha (talk) 18:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is an unbolded Keep here and a previous visit to AFD which means that Soft Deletion is not an option. It usually all comes down to sources so a source analysis of what is present in the article would be helpful at this point.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment.

Ref 1 : non neutral source ( media with no reputation has review of some book not a notable work , no findings on search on internet )

Ref 2 & 3 - not active link, neither found on google

Ref 4 - not at all a media of even minor entity

Ref 5&6 - he attends book inauguration program ( that’s all . Just his name mentioned)

Ref 7. Controversial piece about some legal issues being taken. Doesn’t support the article in any sense.

Rest sources - all are either repetition of above news or your tube material or some small contributions not covered in any genuine source. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added Ram Krishna Bantawa News Archive in external Links. They consist of photographs from old newspaper(offline Source). Rasilshrestha (talk) 16:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From what i heard, his book "Aamalai Chitthi" is currently being translated and is expected to be published soon. Once it becomes available, I believe I will be able to provide you with more relevant online sources for further reference. Rasilshrestha (talk) 14:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as there is now clear evidence of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources newspapers as shown in the news archive link mentioned above in the external links section of the article. Passes WP:GNG in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - COI - looking at the Archies i wonder how so much personal info (like old newspapers copies) and he is planning to make an English version of some book , can be gathered unless editor knows and have approach with the subject. Recent update in the article also describes the same thing. Nothing but a Desperate attempt.Rahmatula786 (talk) 04:15, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

I appreciate your concern, but as I mentioned earlier, I have photographs of offline sources that I have used for my research. Regarding the English translation, it is based on news related to Aamalai Chitthi (https://annapurnapost.com/story/451773/), where the translator Devi Panthi has spoken about it.

I assure you, this is not a desperate attempt, If it were, I would have included additional details of the author. Instead, my article focuses primarily on the subject's songs, novels, and books that he has written. For example, I have read Shrill Mist and am currently reading another work. The song I referenced is also publicly available on YouTube.

Thank you for understanding, and I hope this clarifies any confusion. Rasilshrestha (talk) 05:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How did u get all photographs , newspaper cuts , u kept in archives. What kind of research ur doing on him, can u clarify. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:23, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I collected photographs from various sources, including a news archive where old newspapers are stacked. Unfortunately, I couldn’t obtain any materials from Gorkhapatra, as they dont allow. Some of the newspapers I used were already in my possession at home, while others were gathered during my visit to a book launch event.

The event was held to celebrate the author’s return from Hong Kong and his book launch. It featured displays of certificates for his awards and documents with official letterheads. However, I chose not to mention these certificates or documents in my article, as I wasn’t entirely certain about their authenticity or relevance Rasilshrestha (talk) 06:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you are related with him, how come you find or keen to find those stuff. Have you ever done such efforts to make any other article in Wikipedia. So far i can see , you are here just to make this article. If ur a genuine editor. You might have participated in various other articles, agenda . Did you understand it now. U have altogether 63 edits and almost all for this article only since May 5. That clearly shows what you are looking for . I guess u will come with some other explanations. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:20, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

Thank you for your concern. I’m currently a student in my final year, and I have a deep interest in Nepali literature, arts, and culture, especially Newar traditions and history, as I am a Newar myself. I also enjoy learning about historical topics and sharing knowledge.

I want to clarify that I am not connected to the author mentioned in the article, nor am I being paid for my contributions. If this were a paid effort, I believe the author would have hired someone more experienced than me. As a newcomer to Wikipedia, I am still learning and this article has been my starting point.

I plan to work on more articles in the future and am currently gathering resources for my next article as i have already mentioned earlier. Regarding the current article, my intent has been to present information in a neutral tone. If I were biased or paid, my contributions would likely reflect that, but I have strived to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines.

Wikipedia encourages contributors to improve content where they can, and I believe my contributions are consistent with this principle.

While it’s true that I haven’t contributed extensively to other articles yet, everyone starts somewhere. My current focus on this article does not diminish my genuine intention to support Wikipedia’s mission of providing accurate, unbiased information.

If you have specific concerns about my edits, I’d be happy to discuss and address them transparently. I value constructive feedback and aim to contribute positively to the platform. Rasilshrestha (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your explanation doesn’t justify how you gathered all those photos and newspapers pieces put in archives . Anyway i leave it for now. And want to see how other editors put their views. Rahmatula786 (talk) 14:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

I respect your concerns and your efforts to make Wikipedia a reliable and comprehensive source of information for everyone. As a newcomer, I would greatly value your feedback on how I can improve my article. Could you please guide me on how to make it more effective? Also, do you think there are any changes I should consider?

Thank you for your time and assistance in advance. I truly appreciate your support and feedback. Rasilshrestha (talk) 04:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Seems offline sources are available as provided in [16]. The same source mentions that his book is included in the Tribhuvan University curriculum. Also suggest the original editor to add the list of awards with sources.nirmal (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comment. I will surely be working on making changes to the article and add list of awards received by the author. Rasilshrestha (talk) 16:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot read Nepali but it looks like the GNG has been met here. Bearian, some sources have been added since your !vote, so I am pinging you in case you would like to re-assess. Toadspike [Talk] 10:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, he insulted an older woman and dismissed her ability to read. Last time I checked, that's a grave taboo, the sort of thing that makes your Hajura'āmā box your ear. I'm done with this Sealioning. Bearian (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I sincerely apologize if my previous message came across as disrespectful. That was never my intention. I truly appreciate your friend's representation of Nepal at WOREC and admire her love for reading. If she’s interested, I’d be happy to lend her a book by the author. I only have two books with me one is the english translation of Saghan Tuwanlo and the other one is Aamalai Chitthi.

I’m new to Wikipedia and still learning how things work. I plan to write another article soon, perhaps about a Nepalese singer or a temple in my hometown. Once again, I apologize if I caused any offense and hope to move forward respectfully. Rasilshrestha (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. The consensus is almost around the corner.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 12:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Sealioning aside, the offline sources are available and they seem to be enough to satisfy WP:GNG. I'm also mindful of WP:NOBITE, so I will assume good faith on the part of Rasilshrestha.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.

I am currently dedicating my time to working on a new article while contributing to Wikipedia during my free time. I plan to publish the article within the next three to four months and would greatly appreciate your guidance, support, and constructive feedback throughout this process.

Additionally, I would like to inquire about incorporating offline sources, such as old newspaper articles that are not available online. Should I upload these resources to the Internet Archive, as I did with this article, or are there alternative methods?

Thank you. Rasilshrestha (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rosaura Lopez

AfDs for this article:

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

Unreferenced article about a non-notable individual. She may have written a (small press/self-published?) book about her time as Lennon and Ono's maid, but neither she nor the book meet our notability guidelines. --wooden superman 12:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 14:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Women. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 14:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - it's worth noting that the first discussion outcome was keep, though I realize that was a while ago. DaffodilOcean (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I spotted that after I nominated it, but the arguments from back then seem incredibly weak! --wooden superman 18:10, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of articles related to the Sun

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

Looks like this falls under WP:NOTDIRECTORY. The list contains some pages from the Category:Sun, but omits many other "related" stuff. The inclusion criteria is very vague: all heliophysics satellites are related to the Sun, but also all Sun deities, all Solar eclipses, etc. Artem.G (talk) 12:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Astronomy, and Lists. Artem.G (talk) 12:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete Inclusion criterion is too vague and broad. Mangoe (talk) 13:31, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – The footnote template [17] serves this function better than an article page. Svartner (talk) 15:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unhokhasor Olowu

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

Fails WP:NBIO; article cites no sources (neither do those on Gun and Igbo Wikipedia), and I'm unable to find any. Images were provided by the article creator and primary contributor as "own work" so don't lead to any sources to establish notability. Ligaturama (talk) 11:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Royalty and nobility. Ligaturama (talk) 11:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Payel Mithai Sarkar

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

No WP:RS found, routine coverage in sites. For Times of India see, WP:TIMESOFINDIA. No significant roles in notable films, fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Taabii (talk) 11:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, India, and West Bengal. Taabii (talk) 11:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I agree with the nominator of this discussion and wish to acknowledge that I am the creator of this page. Upon review, I believe the article is not yet ready for the main space, as the subject may not meet the notability criteria at this time.

Therefore, I request that an administrator close this discussion and either move the article to the draft space or delete it. I intend to work on improving the content and addressing the notability concerns in the future. Thank you for your understanding. --Garvitpandey1522 (talk) 12:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Garvitpandey1522 You can edit it while in discussion. You should understand this before publishing in the Mainspace, I request you to try with Wikipedia:Articles for creation in future. Taabii (talk) 13:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Unable to verify the roles she played in the television shows listed in the filmography table and with no reliable sources available, subject fails both GNG and NACTOR. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Altaf Tadavi

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

No other reason of notability except winning a season of Big Boss, a notable reality show. The subject fails WP:ENT and WP:MUSICBIO. Also see MC Stan, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MC Stan, this and this Taabii (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, India, and Maharashtra. Taabii (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Media Mender 📬✍🏻 12:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kyukodai

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

Clearly a WP:DABPARTIAL situation here. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disambiguations and Japan. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is there a source for Kyukodai being an abbreviation for Kurume Institute of Technology - and if so, how's it written? I've only found uses of it for Kyushu Institute of Technology (as 九工大, e.g. in names of stations near the campuses). Adam Sampson (talk) 17:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And there seem to be slightly more hits for Kyushukodai (九州工大) for the latter... Adam Sampson (talk) 18:10, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Culbertson

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

Doesn't seem to meet WP:ACADEMIC. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 10:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Women. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 10:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I think it's close. Her full CV is available on her website here. She's a full professor at the University of Edinburgh with an h-index of 28, which is quite good for her field. I don't see any major awards or fellowships that could meet C2 or C3 of WP:NPROF, and there's no indication of C4-C6. She has quite a few good media appearances but probably not enough for C7, and a few editorial board positions but none of the editor in chief positions necessary for C8. She also hasn't written any books as far as I can tell so no possibility of an WP:NAUTHOR pass, and I don't see any secondary coverage that could indicate a WP:GNG pass. I'm leaning keep on the basis of WP:NPROF#C1 for a number of well-cited papers, but I think it's probably somewhat borderline. MCE89 (talk) 11:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Scotland and Maryland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per my earlier unprod; I think her citation record is good enough for WP:PROF#C1, and she holds a Personal Chair of Experimental Linguistics at the University of Edinburgh, which might plausibly be enough for #C5. Membership in the Young Academy of Europe is probably not quite enough for #C3 by itself, but it's close as well. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagadai

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

In this disambiguation page, none of the articles listed have titles related to "Nagadai". It is unclear why this page was created. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. ZyphorianNexus ^Talk 10:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete clearly case of WP:DABPARTIAL. Also "Dai" is the shorten term for University in Japanese. (shorten for Daigaku) Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 10:10, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Okay, please bear in mind that I only took Japanese for a couple years and it's been a while, and nor do I get a lot of nuances. 長大, when read as ながだい / nagadai, is actually an abbreviation for Nagano University and Nagaoka University. [18]2 . However, 長大 is apparently read as choudai when referring to Nagasaki University. So neither of the deletion arguments works right now. That being said, I'm not entirely sure who will be typing in an abbreviation in romaji on the English Wikipedia. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 10:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhishek Dhania

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

Fails WP:GNG. IPS officer recently promoted to DCP, just doing his duty. Sources only cover transfers and appointment. Nothing showing notability or significant contributions. Junbeesh (talk) 09:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and Bihar. Junbeesh (talk) 09:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Caravanserais of Iran

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

Entirely unsourced, fails WP:NOTDIRECTORY, previously draftofied but the author decided to move back to mainspace so nominating here instead. CoconutOctopus talk 09:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Middle East and Iran. CoconutOctopus talk 09:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sudhanoti (state)

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

Recreation of article redirected (because unverifiable) after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sudhanoti. There are no good sources for a state "Sudhanoti" which was formed in 1407[19]. There are no sources about the supposed founder of the state, Jassi Khan Saddozai[20]. There are no sources for Nawab defeating Bhan in 1407[21].

Related articles like Shams-Ud-Din Khan probably also need checking. Fram (talk) 09:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Pakistan. Fram (talk) 09:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Fram Sir, please see the answers to your four questions on the Sidhnauti state,

Number one: What are the sources of the state "Sidhnauti" established in 1407?

Answer number one is in this link of the book, open it👇

https://archive.org/details/register-sudhnoti-english-version_20250110/page/48/mode/1up

Number two: There are no sources about the founder of the state, Jassi Khan Saduzai

The answer to this question is also in this link of the book, open it👇

https://archive.org/details/register-sudhnoti-english-version_20250110/page/35/mode/1up

Number three: Is there no source to defeat Nawab Jas Khan's brother in 1407?

The answer to this question is also in this link of the book, open it👇

https://archive.org/details/register-sudhnoti-english-version_20250110/page/32/mode/1up

I sincerely hope that you will not restrict Wikipedia after conducting a scholarly review. thank you Abdul Wah (talk) 12:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please also see these references, open the book link, thank you.👇

https://archive.org/details/register-sudhnoti-english-version_20250110/page/33/mode/1up Abdul Wah (talk) 12:10, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sardar Shams belonged to Sidhanoti. But in this article he is being made the governor of Poonch, which is really worth investigating. Abdul Wah (talk) 12:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone else reading this AfD and the edits surrounding it may be interested in the very recently declined drafts Draft:REGISTER SUDHNOTI and Draft:Yusuf Khan Abakhil Saduzai, about the above "book" (which seems to be unpublished) and its author. Fram (talk) 12:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should have a scholarly discussion on the "Siddhnavite" deletion nomination at this time? Instead, link other articles to it. Abdul Wah (talk) 14:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of chaos in the article due to disruptive editing which is also nonsensically copying text from other articles and the source (literally copy pasting, not even summarizing or paraphrasing)

The Register Sudhnoti book says that it is closely based on the original Register Sudhnoti written in the 1960s in the Urdu language, but was not published due to the writers death. It also claims to derive information from two books written in Persian; Maakhaz-e-Sudhnuti and Diropnama. Can someone find any links for these books, or contact the author to upload them to archive.org? Sazzrel (talk) 15:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Sidhanuti Register) is a collection of two books originally written in 1690 and 1855, the source of which is the book Sidhanuti and Dirupnama, the introduction of which can be seen in the link.👇

https://archive.org/details/register-sudhnoti-english-version_20250110/page/18/mode/1up

Now this page should be left to the scholarly review of (Fram) Sir, as we have already provided scholarly references on it. Now it is to be seen the competence and honesty of the reviewer as to what decision he makes on it. Abdul Wah (talk) 16:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Sudhanoti region which was 1420 square kilometers, consisting of the present day whole Sudhanoti District and Poonch District, Pakistan

• (1947-) Sudhanoti District = area is 569 square kilometers

•(1407-1830) Former Sudhanoti (region) = area is 1420 square kilometers

One unique aspect of former Sudhanoti region is that the region until the end of the 18th century, it was never part of any external, Poonchi, Indian, or Kashmiri sultanate, despite being surrounded by large empires. KhanShuja313 (talk) 16:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence, none whatsoever, for a book "Dirop Nama" written in 1690, as claimed by the "Register"[22]. There is no evidence for the writer of that work, Hafiz Waja Khan. There is equally no evidence for a writer called "Sardar Suba Khan" or for their 1855 book. All of this appears for the first and only time in the Register, and no one at all has ever described the Sudhanoti state which existed from 1407 until the 1830s or so. This is extremely unlikely. The link to the sources for the Register then claims that these two books were translated in Urdu in 1969. Again, I can't find any evidence for this. Fram (talk) 17:19, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of spacewalks since 2025

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

The result was ‎ Withdrawn

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

Now that we have had the first private spacewalks, are new spacewalks really notable enough to have a separate list for future ones? While they may still get mentioned, it's rare that they are the focus of much attention any longer. Creating lists for things that happen regularly but aren't notable in themselves or as a group fails WP:LISTN. Fram (talk) 08:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Events, and Spaceflight. Fram (talk) 08:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I missed the memo when spacewalks became as commonplace as walks in the park. For now, they seem to be still notable or at least covered by sources. --cyclopia ^speak! 09:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

B. K. Goenka

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

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. Just a detailed resume WP:NORESUMES. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was an AfD discussion in the past Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balkrishan Goenka, which should be considered for this discussion. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 08:01, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Source 5 is a RS, briefly mentioning him in relation to the company. 8 is about his housing, 11 is about a lunch conversation with him, 15 is him giving his opinions... Some coverage about the Welspun company. I don't see notability for this individual with the sourcing used, nor can I find much else. The rest of the sourcing aren't in RS or don't help notability. Still not seeing enough to build an article with. Oaktree b (talk) 14:29, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manish Kejriwal

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

A promotional biography of a businessman fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. Majorly citations are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, WP:ROUTINE, and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the whole page resembles a detailed resume WP:NORESUMES. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Just routine and trivial coverage that doesn't stand out. Procyon117 (talk) 15:30, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - found [23], [24], and [25]. Hence the subject is notable per WP:BASIC. Chikwendummesonma (talk) 19:14, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The promotional tone in the article can be fixed. I reviewed the sources, I can say that the subject has significant coverage in WP:Reliable sources and it meets the WP:NBIO. Taabii (talk) 06:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Heptalogy

AfDs for this article:

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

While trilogy is notable, subsequent (longer) concepts are very rarely discussed in depth in literary dictionaries, encyclopedias or other academic woks. This is a "4th" nom but as far as I can tell the previous noms were mass noms including, among other, better known tetralogy. Let's start from the most obscure end of this spectrum. My BEFORE as well as the quotations used for refs here do not show that 'heptalogy' has WP:SIGCOV anywhere, this is just a rarely used dict-def term) that can be redirected to Series fiction (which I am writing now) per WP:ATD-R. The article is just a dict def plus a list of notable heptalogies. Frankly, as I have recently begun incrasingly reviewing and writing about literature, I very much doubt we need more than the article on trilogy, as from the perspective of literature studies, there is no significance difference between the number of installments in a series outside 'short' and 'long'. For now, however, let's cut some dict-cruft. And if anyone wants to keep this - pleas show us how this meets SIGCOV. PS. Perhaps the list could be split into the list of heptalogies, if WP:LISTN can be shown to be met... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Lists. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I take it you're bringing this here because of prior AfDs, rather than BLAR'ing it when your new article is ready? Jclemens (talk) 09:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Also called septology, cf. Jon Fosse. Geschichte (talk) 14:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete I have to say that the division of serial novels according to the number of volumes really makes no sense except as part of a general discussion of the class. Maybe. It's particularly obvious when you have something like the Earthsea books where for a long time there were three, then a fourth, and I lost track at how much further Leguin went after that. Does anyone refer to the series as an N-olgy where N is greater than three? And does anyone care what N equals? I'm just not seeing this as a meaningful class. Mangoe (talk) 14:51, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Nice work on the Series fiction article! Obviously the exact number of works is not a defining characteristic that connects a series to others with multiple volumes. A curated list may be good for the main article, but not sorted by number of works. Reywas92^Talk 14:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: obviously a notable topic and a useful entry (See the three precedent AfDs, please; lists of notable works that are considered so include https://www.babelio.com/liste/6017/Les-plus-belles-heptalogies (in French)). -Mushy Yank. 16:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ITSNOTABLE, WP:ITSUSEFUL, WP:LASTTIME. Congrats on managing to get three separate arguments to avoid combined into a single short sentence or two. Nor does your WP:UGC link confer even a whiff of notability to the topic, which if it were so obviously notable, wouldn't require resorting to a French source in the first place. Moreover, if you had actually looked at those previous nominations that you brought up, you'd see they were split between delete, keep, and no consensus. And the keep was part of a bundle so is harder to judge on its own. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 01:04, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (an edit-conflict with the above response), no, I disagree. Several of the sources currently used in Heptalogy discuss specifically the seven-ness of these series, stating that there is special significance to the author's choice of seven. The C.S.Lewis references are the obvious ones. These are rock-solid evidence that the concept is wikinotable. The same applies to trilogies, with even more force. The problem here is that our articles on both trilogies and heptalogies are rather poor, lazily producing lists rather than discussing the underlying concept as covered by literary scholars. But AfD is not for clean-up, and the lists aren't awful enough to merit TNT. Merging is a possibility, but I think it might unbalance the Series fiction article; trilogies, for instance, merit an absolutely enormous discussion because three has been seen as super-significant by many authors. There's also a strong need to distinguish, in series-fiction, between those series that are 3/4/5/6/7 by accident, with no underlying significance beyond the author's getting bored and moving on, and those where there is real meaning in the number. I think it's safer to cover this by having articles on the significance of a trilogy/heptalogy etc. rather than repeatedly trying to work out which series are "true" trilogies/heptalogies in the series fiction article. Elemimele (talk) 17:09, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Elemimele I am happy to be proven wrong, but could you expand the article with a few sentences based on the sources that "discuss specifically the seven-ness of these series"? That would help make it more than a list. That said, I expect most n-volume long series, including heptalogies, are that long simply because that's when the author run out of steam, without particular planning to reach that particular target number. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:57, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest I don't feel strongly enough about it to buy the book on C S Lewis, which is obviously one of the major sources, and I don't propose to start writing articles without access to the sources. But the source does exist, which makes deletion awkward. We shouldn't delete just because we can't be bothered to read. Elemimele (talk) 09:27, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't find anything that even the concept of a heptalogy is notable, let alone something that justifies creating a list of them -- a list with a criterion which can be difficult to settle without performing OR due to questions of whether books belong in the same series or not by being set in the same universe (Neal Stephenson's come to mind here). Nor have any convincing arguments been put forward. Frankly, I'm highly dubious that anything past trilogy really deserves an article, but we'll leave that for another day I guess. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 01:00, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zinda Park

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

The article fails to meet WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG as it lacks significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources to establish notability. Its significance revolves around a single protest and lacks substantial information on the park's broader significance. On reading the article I observed some of the article lines read like promotional material, which goes against WP:NOTADVERT. Without comprehensive, independent coverage, the topic does not warrant a standalone article. Nxcrypto Message 05:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Nxcrypto Message 05:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:24, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep in past, the sources were not good enough but later many sources are published and they are independent from single protest. See these sources for the example,
It is possible to find more sources independent from the protest incident, but the recent google glitch made it almost impossible, I will still try to find more source. Also, the article was translated. So the WP:NOTADVERT issue we can see on the article is from translation and can be fixed. To me, the topic has necessary elements to be a standalone article. Mehedi Abedin 10:33, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your given sources include local news sites, many of them appear to focus on its tourism appeal rather than offering significant, in-depth coverage that establishes notability. Nxcrypto Message 11:02, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- There is no problem using "local news sites," especially when you are using it to refer to national newspapers like The Daily Star and Dhaka Tribune.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 15:05, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: agree with the nomination, this Park lacks coverage that establish its significance beyond a single protest. It more looks like ADVERT to me. Mr.Hanes Talk 09:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 06:56, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Space Solar Power Exploratory Research and Technology program

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

This article lacks inline cites and the topic is already covered in Space-based_solar_power#Exploratory_Research_and_Technology_program No objection to merging if you think the refs at the end of this article are sufficient. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Spaceflight, and United States of America. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Wolf (musician)

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

I Believe this artcile should be deleted as the article is not notable and the writer of the article has a Conflict of interest. Jake Jakubowski ^Talk 20:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing me towards the notability requirements of the platform. Several updates have been implemented over the past week that I believe meet the requested changes. 71.88.44.206 (talk) 17:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This IP address is Jim Wolf himself, Conflict of interest. If you check the history of this page he has done most of the edits he does himself. Jake Jakubowski ^Talk 23:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jake-jakubowski - this AFD was never transcluded to the log and was missing the templates. I have tried to fix it for you.Jay8g [V•T•E] 04:11, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Connecticut, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:27, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is an Allmusic staff biography which is sigcov sourcing per WP:RSMUSIC: [26]. This profile is sigcov: Korea Herald, which is 5 years after his music became popular so is evidence of WP:SUSTAINED. The New York Times also appears to substantiate the charting in Korea: [27]. Potential here for meeting WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. ResonantDis_tortion 23:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. ResonantDis_tortion 23:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion such as AllMusic and the Korea Herald which support the claim of a hit single on a national chart which therefore passes criteria 2 of WP:NMUSIC in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:08, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the page… Jim wolf is notable enough to have a page. His accomplishment show as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:CE3F:A306:64A0:90CA:D5AD:881B (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as the only well-articulated rationale here is the Keep argument. COI is not a reason to delete an article as it can be addressed through editing and there is no detailed deletion rationale presented. I think that we need to hear from more editors familiar with assessing articles in AFD discussions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Métier

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

Fails to demonstrate notability under WP:NCORP. Available references mostly discuss product launches, no significant coverage of the company itself and the product themselves do not appear independently notable. Brandon (talk) 03:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and California. Brandon (talk) 03:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clear WP:NCORP failure; sources are either non-independent or they are WP:ORGTRIV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, article has been PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:09, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Pincus

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

I don't believe she meets WP:ARTIST. Could not find coverage in google news or books. The awards do not appear major (and not reported in press). She is not part of a permanent collection of notable galleries. LibStar (talk) 03:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Visual arts, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 03:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am looking her up in Australian art sources to check notability. In the meantime, as most of her career has been in Germany and she has received more exposure there, is there any way to refer her article to German Wikipedia and see if the German editors can find her as a notable artist there? LPascal (talk) 00:04, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The German article is also poorly sourced. LibStar (talk) 00:09, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Anne Pincus does not have sources either (other Wikipedia sites have different criteria, and don't always require sources etc). Her own website, shown in the External links section, has a Press section which lists reviews of her exhibitions in publications like Süddeutsche Zeitung and Abendzeitung. Those articles have links to the newspapers' websites - I've just searched Süddeutsche Zeitung and found a 2021 review, but on first glance neither seems to go back far enough for reviews before that. I think as far as galleries are concerned, we'd also need to search in German galleries ... RebeccaGreen (talk) 03:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:08, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have looked at her artist's file in an art library and found enough ephemera and clippings to confirm the accuracy of her CV under "Exhibitions" on her own website. There isn't a lot of information about her in english since she left Australia for Germany in the late 1990s. She has been interviewed by Australian press and looks like occasionally exhibits here but I haven't found any of her works in the collections of the major government galleries. As mentioned in previous comments she might meet German wikipedia's standards for notability. I don't make a keep or delete comment one way or another on principle because I disagree with wikipedia's biased notability criteria for Australian women artists.LPascal (talk) 07:53, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LPascal, did you find any clippings of reviews? If so, could you perhaps include them as sources in the article? (Sorry, you probably would have if there were any - this is probably just wishful thinking!) RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:46, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have added a few sources to the article, and a bit of info. I'm also finding some paywalled sources, such as this [28], and any articles in the Süddeutsche Zeitung beyond the one I have accessed (which is a review of an exhibition, but doesn't seem to be written by an art critic). RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Genlin

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

Highly promotional and of very questionable notability over a WP:SUSTAINED period. Amigao (talk) 03:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, Animal, China, Japan, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Agree that the article as written seems quite promotional in tone, and it seems there might possible be conflict on interest concerns, but those are both things to be fixed through editing, not AfD nominations. If you want to go through and reword all the promotional parts, have at it. There seems to be more than enough coverage to establish notability though (some sources aren’t great, but there are enough that are to establish notability). As for WP:SUSTAINED arguments… I see sources from 2016 - 2024 so I can’t see how it applies here? Absurdum4242 (talk) 16:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, definitely needs cleanup but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Keep but WP:STUBIFY is appropriate. DCsansei (talk) 11:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article seems to have a circular logic to it. Genlin is notable for funding World Dog Alliance, but I cannot find RS to show World Dog Alliance is notable. The whole table in the middle Contributions by Genlin/ World Dog Alliance conflates the two and can be considered original research. for example The joint efforts of Genlin and lobbyists succeeded in convincing Republic Congressman Jeff Denham to include a ban on dog meat consumption into the 2018 Farm Bill passed on 12 December 2018 in the House of Representatives. The bill obtained bipartisan support, notably from Democratic Congressman Alcee Hastings, who had earlier co-sponsored a separate bill to Congress (H.R. 1406 - To amend the Animal Welfare Act to prohibit the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption^[1]) to ban consumption of dog and cat meat but did not succeed in garnering enough support for a standalone bill on animal rights. The 2018 Farm Bill was successfully passed alongside with other agricultural and food policies. the footnote is to the actual bill which does not mention either Genlin or World Dog Alliance. Many other blocks of text in the table do the same thing, state that Genlin has affected some sort of change without proper citations. I cannot see how this article can be stubified. I am hampered by lack of Chinese. I realize that WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, but this falls under WP:TNT.--WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Text - H.R.1406 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): To amend the Animal Welfare Act to prohibit the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption". www.congress.gov. 23 March 2017. Retrieved 18 January 2025.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dien Sanh train crash

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

Fails WP:EVENT. No lasting impact or coverage. All the sources are from March 2015. Whilst number of deaths is not a criterion, we don't generally keep articles with such a low death and injury count. LibStar (talk) 03:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Vietnam. LibStar (talk) 03:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
redirect to List_of level crossing crashes#Vietnam where it is covered. This sort of accident is common and there's no need to go into detail. Mangoe (talk) 14:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This was a major incident in Viet Nam and appears to be a translation of the Vietnamese wiki article, so lacks a WP:LASTING source. I can't find that source since it'd be in Vietnamese, but if it exists this would be an easy keep. SportingFlyer T·C 01:37, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of level crossing crashes per WP:NOTNEWS. BilletsMauves^€500 18:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rafz train crash

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

Fails WP:EVENT. Almost 10 years later, all the coverage is from 2015. No lasting coverage or WP:EFFECT. A zero fatality incident. LibStar (talk) 05:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Switzerland. LibStar (talk) 05:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Mount Carbon train derailment

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

Fails WP:EVENT. Almost 10 years later, all the coverage is from 2015. No lasting coverage or WP:EFFECT. LibStar (talk) 05:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and West Virginia. LibStar (talk) 05:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Even a basic Google search revealed a report on the accident and a U.S. Department of Justice report from 2018 on the first page of results. The policy quoted here clearly says that events with significant national or international coverage are likely to be notable, independently of whether the coverage is long-lasting; but coverage from 2015 was spread across several months, with news about the investigation into the accident being reported in October, and official reports were issued three years later. This nomination failed to comply with WP:BEFORE in that no attempt to determine whether there were additional sources were made, and it clearly did not pay any attention to the rest of the policy actually cited. The most cursory review and search shows that this was a notable event; no possible justification exists for its deletion. P Aculeius (talk) 16:31, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Here is a source from 2017 describing the environmental impact of the derailment:

Stout, Scott A.; Papineau, Joseph; Adkins, Matthew (2018-01-01), Stout, Scott A.; Wang, Zhendi (eds.), "Chapter 20 - Chemical Fingerprinting Assessment of the Impact to River Sediments Following the Bakken Crude Oil Train Derailment and Fire, Mount Carbon, West Virginia", Oil Spill Environmental Forensics Case Studies, Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 419–442, ISBN 978-0-12-804434-6, retrieved 2025-01-22

I agree with above voter that the BEFORE seems insufficent, this was the first result on Google Scholar searching the Wikipedia title. Jumpytoo Talk 18:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soprano clarinet

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

Completely duplicative of clarinet article. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It's not duplicative, and it has the potential to grow as an article to discuss the nuances of the C and A clarinets in more detail (which would be unwieldy in a large article like the Clarinet). While I plan to pull more sources when I have the time, see "The C clarinet" in The Cambridge Companion to the Clarinet for one good example. Why? I Ask (talk) 07:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
redirect to Clarinet Surely we do not need clarinet and soprano clarinet and clarinet family. The issue here is that the article on the usual sort of clarinet is written badly, not that it needs to be distinguished from other sorts (which what we have hatnotes for). Mangoe (talk) 13:37, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then would you also support a merge of bass clarinet and such articles? Why? I Ask (talk) 17:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think this is the wrong approach, but there is a problem here. The distinction of these articles is logical: soprano clarinet is a specific type of instrument, while clarinet is the instrumental family and should provide a broad overview of clarinets. However, I'm not opposed to a merge of clarinet family into the latter due to overlap and think that may be worth exploring instead. Regardless, this article should not be merged into the overarching topic article any more than bass clarinet or E-flat clarinet as it is not a redundant topic. I'll leave few references below that may help patch this article up
- Rendall, F. Geoffrey (1971). "The Clarinet, a Transposing Instrument". The Clarinet. Benn/Norton. pp. 119–125. ISBN 0510367011.
- Lawson, Colin; Tschaikov, Basil; Dobrée, Georgina; Harris, Michael (1995). "The Clarinet Family". In Lawson, Colin (ed.). Cambridge Companion to the Clarinet. Cambridge University Press. pp. 33–74. ISBN 0521476682.
- Baines, Anthony (1991). "The Clarinet". Woodwind Instruments and their History. Faber and Faber. pp. 117–148.
Those should help in article development, I can supply more if needed. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 21:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Titus, Indiana

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

Not getting anything useful on this one; there was a chapel here but there's nothing now, and there never was much. Searching comes up with nothing. Mangoe (talk) 04:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nomination -Samoht27 (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Red T

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

A search for sources yielded nothing in depth to meet WP:ORG. The 2 sources provided are primary. LibStar (talk) 03:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and New York. LibStar (talk) 03:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bohdan Lazarenko

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

I can't seem to find any WP:SIGCOV on this player in either English or Ukrainian. Fails WP:GNG, as a result. Anwegmann (talk) 03:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 03:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Idoghor Melody (talk) 04:23, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mykola Zuyenko

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

I can't seem to find any WP:SIGCOV on this player. He seems to fail WP:GNG, as a result. Anwegmann (talk) 03:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 03:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Idoghor Melody (talk) 04:22, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
His Ukrainian bio is extensive and mentions he was named Master of Sport of the USSR (ANYBIO?) and was considered one of the best players in his country at the time. He seems to have made over 100 top-tier appearances in the USSR and later Ukraine. He's basically guaranteed to have SIGCOV out there. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per COMMONSENSE arguments from Beanie above. Giant Snowman 19:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/Withdraw—Per Beanie's points above. I think they are right that SIGCOV must exist somewhere, just beyond a few Google searches. It would be nice if those sources would actually show up in the article, though. Anwegmann (talk) 19:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manop Leeprasansakul

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

Declined prod that was redirected. I contested the redirect Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_January_8#Manop_Leeprasansakul. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 02:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Thailand. LibStar (talk) 02:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Googling his name in Thai turns up a few hits in relation to his work as a police officer (his 2004 Master's thesis, 2008 news mentioning a transfer to the Inspector General's office, 2016 contact directory giving the rank of Pol.Lt.Col.) in addition to passing mentions in articles about Thailand in international sporting events[29][30], but nothing that could be considered in-depth. The latter two links indicate he's a gold medallist at the 1981 and 1989 SEA Games though. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sartaj Mera Tu Raaj Mera

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

Unless there are non-English sources that can be found, there is nothing I can find that amounts to significant coverage. A redirect to Hum TV would be a good WP:ATD but would not qualify as a standalone page. CNMall41 (talk) 02:00, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 02:01, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hum_TV#Daily_series: , where it is listed. -Mushy Yank. 22:42, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Foster Cherry Award

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

Insufficient evidence can be found that this subject is independently notable - except for the sponsoring organization's own website and materials, the other reliable sources all appear to be passing mentions or entirely promotional in nature as they are announcements that someone has won the award and not substantively about this subject. ElKevbo (talk) 02:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards, Education, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cowie Island

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islands-related deletion discussions. Masterhatch (talk) 15:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Masterhatch (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Firstly, I want to say I don't do this very often so if I make a mistake or miss a step, please forgive me. I do not believe this island meets notability requirements. I can only find one source and there seems to be nothing special about this very small island. Masterhatch (talk) 15:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Cree Lake; see also WP:GEONATURAL. There's not much to be found online about this island apart from placename databases and weather websites. No hits on ProQuest, Google Scholar returns 1 citation (no preview), and Google Books returns a number of hits, but most are for the unrelated "Cowie's Island". Mind matrix 20:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect (to Cree Lake) seems reasonable. I searched several reference databases through my library and nothing about this Cowie Island except name-only mentions in some old books. Similar results on Google/Scholar/Books today. This might just be a name on a map with nothing more ever written about it. --Here2rewrite (talk) 04:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

External Revenue Service

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

I don't believe this meets the notability criteria. The "proposed agency" was mentioned by Trump in a social media post, so it's not clear it will actually be created; no other politician or policymaker has seriously discussed the proposal, and no legislative action has been taken to create the agency. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 20:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: Likely WP:TOOSOON for mainspace as a future planned US government department [sic], but Draft:External Revenue Service should be developed with relevant material in case this becomes a real plan. Novemberjazz 20:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's no valuable content in the article. We don't have any details of this hypothetical agency, and the current piece reads like it was written by a pro-Trump LLM:

This initiative is part of Trump's broader trade policy, which includes imposing tariffs on imports from foreign countries to enforce an "America-first" approach.Trump announced this plan on his Truth Social network, emphasizing the need for foreign entities to pay their "fair share" from trade profits.The creation of this service reflects Trump's commitment to his campaign promises regarding trade levies.
CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 20:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 14. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Social media trends aren't reliable sources and this feels like a joke rejected by Merry Melodies c. 1939 that we've all made once and then said 'never using that joke' again. Nate • (chatter) 21:07, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:SPECULATION - Please see History of taxation in the United States. I believe this would take an act of the US Congress to create - the very attempt of which would create a lot of ticked off constituents. Either way, this is not likely to bear fruition anytime soon. — Maile (talk) 00:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Economics, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Based on https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/113827650534234057 but now Time https://time.com/7206986/trump-external-revenue-service-tariffs-taxes/ and UPI https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-proposes-external-revenue-service-to-tax-foreign-sources/ar-AA1xcB5s?ocid=BingNewsSerp, Reuters, CBS, etc. are covering it. Arbeiten8 (talk) 03:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reuters, CBS, et al. are covering Trump's social media post, not the actual agency. There's still zero indication that this agency will every be established, or that anyone will even try to establish it. It's total nonsense. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 20:38, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom., WP:TOOSOON, and WP:CRYSTAL. Sal2100 (talk) 22:24, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. We do not have to cover everything Trump says. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's a serious plan by someone who is about to be president of the United States. It's being covered by media outlets and treated like a serious plan too. Of course, the idea is crazy, but we also have an article for a fictitious cabinet department named after an internet meme headed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, so I don't think this is too far out there. We have even decided to keep articles for random Twitter shitposters, and this — a serious plan proposed by the president-elect — is certainly more notable than that. It should be noted that the article itself needs significant reworking regardless. Gore2000 (talk) 20:52, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a serious proposal. DOGE has been pretty widely discussed by members of Congress and the media–there's even a caucus. Additionally, Trump can (and plans to) establish DOGE as an advisory committee by executive order. On the other hand, the "ERS" would require Congressional legislation, and it's not clear that he plans to introduce, or would be able to pass, such legislation.

Without follow-up by Trump, this is an article about a social media post. That's not notable. See WP:NOTNEWS, WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 20:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Foreign policy of the second Donald Trump administration, in the tariffs section. That article will be merited in a couple of days. Alternately merge to Second presidential transition of Donald Trump. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:47, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The foreign policy article should cover actually policy, not random tweets. This proposal, unless someone takes steps to implement it, will be totally irrelevant in a few news cycles. It's too soon to have an article discuss it. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 19:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trump is right now promising to establish the External Revenue Service in his inauguration speech to perform many functions of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Arbeiten8 (talk) 17:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He's just mentioned it in his inauguration speech and given the likes of the Associated Press and Time have mentioned it, means I don't think CRYSTAL/TOOSOON applies here since it seems more than likely it will happen in the coming days. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"it seems more than likely than" is the definition of WP:CRYSTAL/WP:TOOSOON. But, even if he does introduce legislation creating this agency soon, it's a long road to passage. Pending legislation doesn't meet the notability requirements. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 01:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- CRYSTAL clearly says "All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred". Which clearly is the case here given the verified coverage before and after President Trump's inaguration speech. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 08:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above, like Department of Government Efficiency Splatterxl – talk 20:59, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I discussed above, there's a key difference between DOGE and ERS. DOGE can be created by executive order, but this agency would require Congressional legislation. Besides, DOGE already exists, but this is just an idea. An idea doesn't warrant an article. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 01:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Due to the press coverage and the fact that it's been mentioned in the inauguration speech. Aŭstriano (talk) 21:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It still doesn't meet notability requirements. He mentioned it, but that doesn't mean he'll move forward with it or that the agency will end up being created. If a bill is introduced or actual action is taken, we should reassess, but for now this isn't notable. CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 01:26, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: for the reasons enumerated in my original post and subsequent discussion CatoTheWiseAss (talk) 21:46, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Economic policy of the second Donald Trump administration, and yes, I know that this page is currently a redirect to the main DJT article, but it's an article which will certainly have to be created soon. At this point the proposal is a notable part of his larger economic and fiscal policy agenda, and was mentioned in his inaugural address. But I do agree that it's not yet quite at the point of warranting an article of its own, in large part since there simply aren't yet many details known about this proposal. But if/when it's further developed, this could well change. -2003:CA:8723:6551:3D79:C1D4:E66F:E1D6 (talk) 23:53, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per WP:CRYSTAL as we do not need a separate article on everything Trump throws out along the way. If anything ever comes of it, OK, but not now. Mangoe (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Right now this is just something Trump mentioned. If something happens then sure, but currently it's a bit too soon to know if that something will actually happen. -Samoht27 (talk) 17:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eric R. Gilbertson

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

This is essentially a resume. The person doesn't appear to pass general notability guidelines. A re-direct to the school is possible, but I question if having a redirect to a small school for every one of their past president is necessary. Graywalls (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following for the same reason:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Michigan. Graywalls (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find articles about his retirement and public speaking events after that, nothing really showing notability. Primary sourcing is used in the article now, so that's not helping. Oaktree b (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep (of ERG article): It seems to me that the central question is whether C6 of WP:NPROF is met by ERG due to their having served as the president of Saginaw Valley State University and of Johnson State College (now part of Vermont State University). Since the former school offers a significant number of master's degrees and three doctorates (DNP; see https://www.svsu.edu/graduateprograms/), it seems to me that that the answer is yes. I qualify this as a weak keep because this is not an R1 university and does not appear to be historically significant. I do agree that WP:GNG is not met, and if the page is to remain it needs significant editing so as to not present as a resume. I see no way for this particular subject to satisfy the other criteria of WP:NPROF. The other page (about JMR) should be considered on its own merits; I am unsure whether we are supposed to be discussing both of them here. Qflib (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Qflib What academic accomplishments and citations does he have? that would qualify under NPROF? My position is that he doesn't qualify under "a significant accredited college or university, director of a highly regarded, notable academic independent research institute or center (which is not a part of a university), president of a notable national or international scholarly society, etc." I believe "significance" or "highly regarded" of this school is subjective and in mine, it's not. Graywalls (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Only one of the 6 criteria of NPROF need to be met in order to establish notability; please read it carefully. I specifically pointed out that I was referring only to C6 of NPROF, so academic citations are immaterial. I also specifically pointed out that "I see no way for this particular subject to satisfy the other criteria of WP:NPROF." I stand by my weak keep recommendation; if other senior editors come on here and convince me otherwise, I am open to input. Qflib (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I buy the WP:NPROF C6 rationale, as president of a mid-sized college/university. I additionally note that I found several local newspaper sources: [31][32][33]. He was involved in a minor scandal regarding a football hazing incident [34][35]. It's weak for a GNG case, but it helps support the NPROF case. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep of both. Even if not technically passing the PROF test, the presidents of medium size state colleges probably will get significant coverage in their state's media. Bearian (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given the repeated use of the word weak, consensus looks like keep but also looks weak so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Still a !delete for me, not passing PROF, the rest doesn't help. Oaktree b (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Saginaw News has a good deal of coverage on him, e.g. this (p2). BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:49, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The same for Ryder, e.g. this and this. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:51, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm not convinced at all of SVSU being a "major" institution; it has only ~1350 papers attached to it across all time periods and fields indexed by Scopus (even Saginaw Cooperative Hospitals, Inc. has 66 papers; compare also to R2 schools American University (~15000 papers) and Yeshiva University (~59000)). So I would not say he is a C6 pass. Newspaper coverage of him might support GNG, however I haven't analyzed those sources yet. JoelleJay (talk) 00:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kaavya Sha

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

From a WP:BEFORE, I am unable to find any independent sources with significant coverage. The only sources I could find with SIGCOV are interviews /wedding announcements, which are ineligible towards GNG. NACTOR is also not met here, as none of these roles are significant enough to warrant a separate article. No plausible ATDR either. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, and Maharashtra. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per references from The New Indian Express, The News Minute, The Times of India [36], [37] and her work in many notable movies as mentioned in the article. Behappyyar (talk) 20:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added more references to it. And Despite this, it is incomprehensible to tag for AfD after a senior editor has already reviewed it. Behappyyar (talk) 06:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There certainly seems to be more than just passing coverage in the Times of India sources.--Ipigott (talk) 08:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep According to WP:GNG, significant coverage from reliable for establishing the notability of a topic. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 08:30, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Ipigott and S-Aura, would you mind mentioning the WP:THREE best sources or the sources you think help the subject pass GNG or NACTOR? It would be great to see a source analysis, as all I could find is routine coverage and nothing independent of the subject. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Loudspeaker (2018 film). Clearly the only named member of the cast and her only lead role [38]. DareshMohan (talk) 04:54, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: To Loudspeaker (2018 film), the better option. Claims notability in someway but lacks sufficient reliable sources to fully support this claim.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 08:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:SIGCOV easily. Here are a few more mentions [39], [40], [41] Tau Corvi (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tau Corvi, Indiaglitz is unreliable and the other two sources are not independent. There seems to be no coverage of the Paisa movie mentioned in the TOI source or about its director. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 21:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jeraxmoira🐉, please explain why Indiatimes is not independent, I don't get it Tau Corvi (talk) 15:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those are interviews and interviews are primary sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't say that this can be classified as an interview [42]. And this is even more so [43]. Anyway, you call these sources not independent, and I still don't understand why. In my opinion, the links I provided demonstrate how a major Indian media covers the life of an actress (her wedding and debut in cinema) Tau Corvi (talk) 17:21, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think they are independent sources? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:03, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any indication that IndiaTimes is affiliated with Kaavya Sha. If there is, please point it out. Tau Corvi (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So by your understanding, IndiaTimes is not independent only if it is affiliated with Kaavya Sha? Please read and understand WP:PRIMARY, WP:SECONDARY, WP:INTERVIEWS and Indiscriminate sources before dropping your two cents in an AfD discussion. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, very informative. I just don't think that, for example, the announcement of a film with Sha, in which her commentary is given, can be considered an interview. In my understanding, this is first and foremost an article about her debut in cinema. Tau Corvi (talk) 22:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

YGL motif

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

Probably fails WP:GNG. It's mentioned in a few studies about motifs and the viruses that have it, but only seems to be a major part of one primary source (the one used in the article). When comparing this motif to others, most of the motifs in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Protein_structural_motifs are much broader in scope than the YGL motif and have been the subject of far more research than the YGL motif. Google search returns 15 (filtered) results, 3 of which (20%) are to Wikipedia. Google Scholar just ten results. Velayinosu (talk) 02:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Biology. Velayinosu (talk) 02:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Preston Grubbs

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

Tagged for notability since 2021. Currently uses only government websites which are reliable but lack independence from the subject. Time to decide as a community whether or not this meets WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 01:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Law, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C.. Skynxnex (talk) 02:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1882 in Scandinavian music

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

We have articles for 1882 in Norwegian music (where this article was an unattributed copy from), 1880s in Danish music, 1882 in Finnish music and 1880s in Swedish music. Comparable to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 in Scandinavian music. Fram (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated for the same reasons:

Fram (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Lists, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 15:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This nomination appears to have been made because User:Fram failed to notice previously that the article existed and doesn't believe that Scandinavia is a clearly-defined region. This isn't a copy of 1882 in Norwegian music; in fact, content of that article has been copied from 1882 in Scandinavian music just to try to prove a point. Who is going to maintain all these "Music in" articles for separate countries? Will they even be completed? Deb (talk) 15:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
2017 version of 1882 in Norwegian music [44]: in your article 1882 in Scandinavian music you have the same three entries with the exact same reference (even down to the copied access-date). Please tell me how you achieved this without copying the older Norway article? Fram (talk) 15:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They're not copies, they are used in a thoughtful way; the wording is not identical. Not that this has anything to do with the proposed deletion of the article. Deb (talk) 16:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added 1881 in Scandinavian music to this nomination, as the same reasons apply. Fram (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- in a previous version of this article, now at 1880s in Danish music, I had removed an entry where the sources indicate that the year is unknown (early 1880s), not certain to be 1881; another entry where the only link with 1881 is that the much earlier event is described in a letter from that year, hardly something important for 1881; and had corrected the title of a work. The claims of "Who is going to maintain all these "Music in" articles" when they are started as unattributed copies of someone else's work, and then expanded with such entries, ring rather hollow. Fram (talk) 17:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Once again you are being careless with the truth. The only reason these single-country articles exist is that you have just created them in order to make a point. There is simply not enough material to build them. Deb (talk) 08:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The Norway article existed long before you created the Scandinavia one. As you are well aware of course, since you started your creation by copying entries from that page with minor adjustments. And the suggestion below, which I already did in part, is to change them into decades-articles, because they will otherwise indeed be rather empty. Fram (talk) 09:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  See User talk:Knuand#2016 in Scandinavian music for a full explanation of why these articles exist. Deb (talk) 14:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I just don't see the justification for a page, or any compelling reason to intersect Scandinavia, music and an individual year. Moreover, Finland was a part of the Russian Empire at the time. Geschichte (talk) 22:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strictly speaking, it was the Grand Duchy of Finland - that's why it's not appropriate to create year articles for Finland before this date, as Fram is attempting to do. Deb (talk) 08:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Years of the 19th century in Finland. Fram (talk) 09:26, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that proves my point. Deb (talk) 14:10, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge If Scandinavian music is an entity itself, then the national articles should be merged to the regional ones. If the national identity is more important, then the regional article should be deleted. There's not a need for this sort of duplication. Either way, for this kind of narrow topic, I'd rather see them as 1880s in X music instead of individual years; when there's not enough info for standalone articles, presenting them with broader context is better. Reywas92^Talk 23:39, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
agreed, I started with individual years but have changed some into decade articles, will probably do the same for the other ones. Fram (talk) 08:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So basically, your plan is to remove individual year articles and put the material I've already created into decade articles. And what are you going to do about the years between 1882 and 2009? I'm not going to do the work for you. Deb (talk) 08:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't want to create the articles in the way consensus seems to be trending (not for Scandinavia as a whole, but by country), then you don't create these articles, simple. No idea why you only want to do this if it can happen as "year in Scandinavia" and not as "decade in Denmark" and so on (which will result in half the number of pages, should make life easier). Fram (talk) 09:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, great, let's just have an article for every ten years and leave out all the detail. But where does that leave your argument about "duplication"? Deb (talk) 14:09, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Deb. As far as I can tell from what I found in Google Books, "Scandinavian music" is a thing. You'll find books on "Scandinavian music" generally, and comments such as "Scandinavian music as a whole" [45] and "Scandinavian music . . . is distinctive" and is "a school": [46]. You will find, even in English, Billboard spotlight "review of the year" articles on Scandanavian music in 1971, 1972, 1973, 1979, 1981 and probably every other year, though I can't search the entire run. And Scandanavia has had music periodicals since at least the 18th century: [47]. And I think that indicates that most years in Scandanavian music are likely notable. James500 (talk) 22:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gharida Farooqi

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

Fails WP:GNG. Mainly covered in gossip media and controversy like "child abuse" is not enough to pass WP:SIGCOV. Gheus (talk) 19:38, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I thought and remembered that I had edited this Wikipedia article in the past. So I used 'View history' TAB to look ... and found my edits from 2017. To my surprise, someone had vandalized and totally blanked all my newspaper references from 2017. Today, I have restored my relevant and reliable newspaper references plus added some new ones. The above Deletion nominator, Gheus, was right in nominating it for deletion because I saw that nothing but 'gossip media' references were left at this article. Now, I leave it to the Wikipedia community to decide whether to 'delete' or 'keep' this article...Ngrewal1 (talk) 01:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP This journalist has been active in TV journalism since 2004. My Google search on her turned up many newspaper and other reliable sources. To give a balanced view, I did not remove content from anybody else. In my view, this journalist is very notable and meets WP:GNG now...Ngrewal1 (talk) 19:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HD 222399

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

Does not pass WP:NASTRO? -- Beland (talk) 10:29, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 10:29, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, has a HR number and hence meets criterion one of the guideline cited above. 21 Andromedae (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stars in Andromeda, where it is already listed. The star lacks any significant coverage; it's just an ordinary, distant, subgiant star with no particularly interesting aspects yet identified. Praemonitus (talk) 07:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of stars in Andromeda per above reasoning. Mangoe (talk) 04:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per 21.Andromedae. cyclopia ^speak! 09:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HD 41162

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

Does not pass WP:NASTRO? -- Beland (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, has a HR number and hence meets criterion one of the guideline cited above, but this article is really poorly-written and has to be fixed. 21 Andromedae (talk) 22:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stars in Auriga, where it is already listed. The system lacks any significant coverage. Praemonitus (talk) 07:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of stars in Auriga per above. Mangoe (talk) 04:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HD 174569

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

Does not pass WP:NASTRO? -- Beland (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stars in Aquila, where it is already listed. The system lacks any significant coverage. Praemonitus (talk) 13:28, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, has a HR number and hence pass criterion one of WP:NASTCRIT. Has sufficient notability for a Wikipedia article. 21 Andromedae (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of stars in Aquila per above. I don't agree that just having an entry in the YBS list is uncommon enough to be remarkable in itself. Mangoe (talk) 04:57, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per 21.Andromedae cyclopia ^speak! 09:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: WP:NASTCRIT says that notability is only presumed if at least one of the criteria is met, not granted. It shouldn't be taken as overriding the general notability guideline, and that also applies to some of the other astronomy AfDs currently ongoing. 2804:14C:CCA1:4388:2234:D116:58EC:4E69 (talk) 14:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nordea Bank Norge

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

I don't see how it passes WP:NCORP. The notability banner has remained unresolved for 12 years. Cinder painter (talk) 10:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Norway. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Large bank in Norway, but redirect to Nordea for the time being. Geschichte (talk) 09:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tomato Bank

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

I don't see how this defunct Chinese bank passes WP:NCORP. No reliable sources or significant coverage Cinder painter (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Royal Business Bank, at least partially. One of ~100 California chartered banks folding is not insignificant. Brandon (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Daysog, Rick (2006-11-09). "Isle company weighs $31M bid". The Honolulu Advertiser. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "A California banking company on an expansion spree has made an unsolicited $31 million bid for a majority stake in the parent company of Honolulu-based Finance Factors. ... TFC is the parent of Alhambra, Calif.-based TomatoBank, which operates five branches in the Los Angeles area and has about $350 million in assets. The bank, known as InterBusiness Bank until it changed its name in August, was founded six years ago by Los Angeles physician Stephen Liu. The bank specializes in lending to Los Angeles' Asian-American and Hispanic communities. ... The bid for Finance Enterprises underscores TomatoBank's aggressive growth strategy."
2. Kuehner-Hebert, Katie (2006-08-14). "Fruit? Vegetable? Neither; CEO: New name appeals to target markets". American Banker. Vol. 171, no. 155. pp. 1–5. EBSCOhost 21948502. Factiva AMB0000020060814e28e00003. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "Dr. Stephen Liu likes to compare the bank he co-founded six years ago to a tomato. ... In fact, the medical doctor-turned-banker likes the comparison so much that last week the $350 million-asset InterBusiness Bank in Alhambra, Calif., officially changed its name to TomatoBank. Dr. Liu, its chairman and chief executive officer, said he had always thought the old name was too generic, and he has been trying to persuade the board to change it for years to give the bank more visibility in the ethnic communities it targets in and around Los Angeles. The new name is not a complete stretch. The bank has used a tomato as its logo since its inception, and its Web address has been www.tomatobank.com since 2001. Dr. Liu said the word "tomato" resonates with Asian-American customers, because banks in Asia are often named after fruit, vegetables, or flowers grown in their region, and Asian-Americans particularly love tomatoes. ... Richard A. Soukup, a partner with the Chicago office of the consulting firm, Plante & Moran PLLC, said that the TomatoBank name is "refreshingly innovative" and will definitely be a conversation starter. "But time will tell if it has legs and branding appeal." Ted Salame, the president of BrandEquity International in Newton, Mass., thinks it will. ... Dr. Liu's bank actually had done quite well under the InterBusiness name. Its assets have nearly doubled in the last two years. Last year its net income rose 83%, to $3.7 million. Its efficiency ratio, its return on assets, and its net interest margin are all above average for banks in its asset class, according to Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. data."
3. Allen, Mike (2007-10-01). "TomatoBank Targets Latino Customers, Opens Chula Vista Branch". San Diego Business Journal. Vol. 28, no. 40. p. 3. EBSCOhost 27088532. Factiva SDBJ000020071026e3a100006.
  The article notes: "In the world of bank names that are mundane and commonplace, Tomato-Bank, which recently opened an office in Chula Vista, stands out. The Alhambra-based commercial bank was formerly known as InterBusiness Bank until last year when it rebranded itself. ... The change appears to be working as Tomato's total assets sprouted up 26 percent over the year ended June 30 to $445 million, while its loans increased 36 percent over the same period to $341 million. ... Buoyed by the bank's growth, it decided to open a branch in the San Diego area, the first branch outside Los Angeles County. ... To attract its targeted customers, TomatoBank's first branch is housed inside an El Tigre Supermarket, a supermarket chain based in Escondido that caters to Latinos. ... Hans Ganz, chief executive of Chula Vista-based Pacific Trust Bank with some $770 million in assets, had not heard of TomatoBank, but said their strategy could be effective. Ganz said other banks have been successful at targeting specific minority groups, such as Nara Bank in Los Angeles, which targets Korean Americans."
4. Tanaka, Rodney (2007-02-25). "Banking with a personal touch". San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Factiva xKRTGB00020070227e32q00001. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "Step into TomatoBank in Alhambra and you may not realize you're in a bank, since you don't wait to interact with a teller standing behind Plexiglas. ... The company also focuses on community service. The bank's latest partnership is with the Urban Education Partnership, which focuses on helping high-poverty, multi-cultural Los Angeles County schools with academic achievement. ... The bank, which has 75 employees, has grown 40 percent to 50 percent each year, he said. The company has six offices and plans to open two more in Arcadia and San Diego."
5. Schachar, Natalie (2015-11-11). "In Merger, Interesting Name of TomatoBank to Disappear". Los Angeles Business Journal. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "The parent company of L.A.’s Royal Business Bank announced Tuesday that it has signed a definitive agreement to acquire the parent of TomatoBank. Assuming the transaction is completed as expected in the first quarter next year, what may be L.A.’s most interesting bank name will disappear thereafter. TomatoBank, which operates six full-service branches in Los Angeles and Orange County, primarily serves Asian-American communities, the same demographic focus of Royal Business Bank. TFC Holding Co., TomatoBank’s parent, reported assets of about $488 million, deposits of $421 million and shareholders’ equity of $60.5 million as of Sept. 30. All TomatoBank branches will eventually be converted to Royal Business Bank."
6. Tanaka, Rodney (2007-05-30). "Ripe investments". San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Factiva KRTGB00020070531e35v0002t. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "TomatoBank planted its latest seed, opening a new branch in Arcadia Saturday. TomatoBank has eight branches, including regional offices in Industry and Alhambra. ... Founded in 2000, has about $410 million in assets and is expected to approach $1 billion by the end of the decade, according to the bank. ... TomatoBank is also active in the community, providing summer internships through the Urban Education Partnership and sponsoring financial literacy programs for the American Junior Golf Association."
7. Daysog, Rick (2006-11-22). "Finance Factors' owner rejects TFC takeover bid". The Honolulu Advertiser. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
  The article notes: "Finance Enterprises Ltd. said its 12-member board voted unanimously last week to turn down TFC Holdings Inc.'s $1,000-per-share offer for 31,000 shares, or 51 percent of the company's stock. ... TFC is the parent of Alhambra, Calif.-based TomatoBank, which has $350 million in assets and operates five branches in the Los Angeles area. TomatoBank, known as InterBusiness Bank until it changed its name in August, was founded six years ago by Los Angeles physician Stephen Liu. The bank specializes in lending to Los Angeles' Asian-American and Hispanic communities."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Tomato Bank (traditional Chinese: 宏基銀行; simplified Chinese: 宏基银行) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 02:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Cunard (talk) 02:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Fanny Hardwick

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

Fails WP:NEVENT. All source is breaking news or trial stuff, no retrospection, after the execution it was seemingly never discussed again. Interestingly, not a case of recentism (all sourcing is from 1901). There is one very brief mention in an academic article from this year in an article about Australian executions, but otherwise nothing. If we had some article like "list of people executed by Australia" I would suggest a redirect to that, but we do not. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, and Australia. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:39, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of people legally executed in Queensland. There are a couple of sources from after 1901, but agree that it's not enough to meet WP:NEVENT. MCE89 (talk) 17:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@MCE89 For purposes of consensus building I agree with redirect (I would have suggested it if I knew that page existed...)

Out of curiosity what are the other post-1901 sources? Some stuff on Trove? PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah nothing much, just a couple of articles from 1902 [48] and 1904 [49] that strike me as basically that era's equivalent of sensationalised true crime stories. Nothing to suggest any real notability, and they're close enough to the murder that they don't really suggest any lasting coverage. MCE89 (talk) 18:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the article mentioned above in addition the redirect. Or at least an inclusion of the references.Topic does not seem to have lasting importance. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 18:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Chico

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

As a city councilman, fails WP:NPOL. The sourcing does not demonstrate WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Chicago city councilors are assumed notable under longstanding consensus. Chicago is literally the example of notable city councilors at WP:POLOUTCOMES. R. G. Checkers^talk 23:07, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:24, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per User:R. G. Checkers' point regarding WP:POLOUTCOMES. I do share some reservations about the article at present not including more third-party sourcing and content in general.--Mpen320 (talk) 22:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: POLOUTCOMES is not a community endorsed guideline or policy. It is instead a recording of what has happened. But when challenged an article should be shown to be notable and not by relying on the OUTCOMES page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete Mostly this is an argument that WP:POLOUTCOMES is, like many such notability tests, largely bad where it is invoked. There is no explicit claim of notability, and Mr. Chico is not claimed to have done anything that anyone outside of the city limits might care about; I have to suspect that even in Chicago he is a relatively anonymous figure to those who don't have to deal with him on a work basis. There are a very few cases where city councilmembers have come to notoriety, but considering for example Marion Barry, most of his infamy came about while he was mayor, and his second go-'round on the council was largely notable simply because he was elected at all after the drug bust. There is no claim that this person even vaguely approaches that. Mangoe (talk) 05:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if the article sees improvement, delete if it doesn't. While it's true that Chicago is a large, internationally prominent city whose city councillors would commonly be accepted as passing WP:NPOL #2, that still requires the article to contain substantive content about his political impact (specific things he did, specific projects he spearheaded, specific effects his work had on the city, and on and so forth), supported by WP:GNG-worthy coverage about it in reliable sources.
We would almost certainly keep an article about a Chicago city councillor that had substantive content about his political career in it and was well-sourced — but even in the global megacity tier, we still do not keep articles about city councillors that basically amount to "he exists, the end" and are supported entirely by primary sources and run of the mill candidate questionnaires of the type that even the non-winning candidates who lost the election would still be able to show.
I don't know enough about Chicago politics to know whether the necessary depth of improvement is possible here or not, but it would require significantly more substance and sourcing than this to become keepable. POLOUTCOMES means that substantive articles about big-city councillors are permissible, not that just writing and sourcing the bare minimum necessary to verify that the person exists would be enough in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore City Council District 1

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

Unclear what makes this special from the other districts or pass WP:GNG. Redirect to Baltimore City Council. charlotte ^👸♥ 01:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Geography, and Maryland. Skynxnex (talk) 02:23, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Di Thorley

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

Simply being mayor does not guarantee notability. She does not meet WP:NPOL, a small amount of coverage eg her commenting on water issues but insufficient WP:SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 01:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 01:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The nominator is correct that being mayor doesn't guarantee notability, but I think there's just about enough SIGCOV. She's continued to get quite a bit of coverage as a candidate and potential candidate [50] [51] [52] [53] and she is still regularly profiled in discussions about water in Australia [54] [55] [56]. There's also quite a bit of coverage of her as mayor from the early 2000s on Proquest, but I'm having trouble tracking down whether the Toowoomba Chronicle from that period has been digitised (I expect that it would contain unambiguous SIGCOV if anyone is able to access articles from that period). Overall I think it's enough to constitute the "significant press coverage" that WP:NPOL requires of local political figures. If others disagree, I'm undecided whether the best ATD would be a merge/redirect to 2016 Toowoomba South state by-election or to 2006 Toowoomba Water Futures referendum. MCE89 (talk) 01:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Hack (talk) 03:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simon M. Kirby

AfDs for this article:

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

Doesn’t seem to meet WP:ACADEMIC. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 00:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Academics and educators. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 00:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Evo-psych is a high-citation field but still I think his citation counts [57] are enough for WP:PROF#C1. He holds a personal chair at the University of Edinburgh, possibly enough for #C5. He is a Fellow of the British Academy [58], a clear pass of #C3. And multiple reviews of multiple books [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] give him another case for notability through WP:AUTHOR. I don't know what WP:BEFORE the nominator tried to produce this WP:VAGUEWAVE towards our notability guidelines but it wasn't enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. Nominator deserves a trout for this inept nomination. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACADEMIC and WP:AUTHOR per above. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Language, and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:19, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Kinström

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

Doesn’t seem to meet WP:BIO. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 00:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, Music, and Sweden. _signed,SpringProof ^talk 00:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I can't access Svenskt Klavikordbygge 1720–1820, but the other two sources in the article just contain trivial mentions (the first source just cites the second and third sources). Can't find anything other than trivial mentions in my search, but historical bios are relatively likely to have hard-to-find sources. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:17, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: She doesn't have an entry on the Swedish Wikipedia, although her husband and brother (both also instrument makers) do. She's briefly mentioned here and here (under her maiden name) in entries on her husband, which just say that she continued operating his workshop after his death. She's also briefly mentioned here in an entry on her brother. Sadly it seems like she's basically been treated as a side note in sources about her male relatives. Hopefully someone else is able to find something more substantial, because from what I could find I'm not sure there's enough in the historical record to warrant an article about her. MCE89 (talk) 06:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the obvious thing to do here is to translate the article on her husband Lars Kinström from Swedish wiki: he is certainly notable; and then to merge Christina into that. She may well have done sterling work in her late husband's company, but it seems unlikely that enough has been recorded about her to make a stand-alone article possible. If anyone else feels like doing the translation, that'd be great, otherwise I can do that and then the merge will only take a moment. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[www.congress.gov-1] "Text - H.R.1406 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): To amend the Animal Welfare Act to prohibit the slaughter of dogs and cats for human consumption". www.congress.gov. 23 March 2017. Retrieved 18 January 2025.

[1]