User:Cyberbot I/AfD's requiring attention
Below are the top 25
AfD | Time to close | Votes | Size (bytes) | Relists | Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Het Arubaanse Padvindsters Gilde | 21 days ago | 1 | 5251 | 0 | 1877.9 |
ClanLib | 20 days ago | 1 | 9927 | 0 | 1797.61 |
Pashtunistan conflict | 20 days ago | 2 | 6262 | 0 | 1712.26 |
Bubble laser | 18 days ago | 0 | 5755 | 0 | 1701.73 |
Reformed fundamentalism | 20 days ago | 2 | 5393 | 0 | 1669.35 |
2023 Little Rock tornado | 18 days ago | 0 | 11849 | 0 | 1661.43 |
Installer VISE | 17 days ago | 1 | 5672 | 0 | 1612.06 |
KRLB-LD | 17 days ago | 1 | 3291 | 0 | 1606.82 |
Michele Fitzgerald | 16 days ago | 0 | 5838 | 0 | 1567.05 |
HTML-Kit | 16 days ago | 1 | 5143 | 0 | 1536.9 |
Pretoria Wireless Users Group | 16 days ago | 1 | 4465 | 0 | 1529.56 |
La alta escuela | 16 days ago | 1 | 3672 | 0 | 1515.7 |
Maldives–Switzerland relations | 18 days ago | 3 | 4308 | 0 | 1506.11 |
List of French words of English origin | 17 days ago | 2 | 9560 | 0 | 1499.02 |
A-Plus (rapper) | 19 days ago | 4 | 6624 | 0 | 1489.98 |
Imre Vallyon | 18 days ago | 3 | 8373 | 0 | 1468.25 |
George John Seaton | 18 days ago | 3 | 17381 | 0 | 1453.81 |
WCKV-LD | 17 days ago | 3 | 4649 | 0 | 1446.47 |
Sports broadcasting contracts in Vietnam (2nd nomination) | 15 days ago | 1 | 4506 | 0 | 1444.62 |
Mask Bloc | 14 days ago | 0 | 3617 | 0 | 1428.44 |
Sports broadcasting contracts in Canada | 16 days ago | 2 | 4657 | 0 | 1400.12 |
Sabado Barkada | 14 days ago | 1 | 4046 | 0 | 1391.03 |
University of Colorado Physical Therapy Program | 14 days ago | 1 | 6414 | 0 | 1373.51 |
French exonyms | 17 days ago | 4 | 9924 | 0 | 1354.58 |
Irie Papuni | 13 days ago | 1 | 2908 | 0 | 1336.33 |
Het Arubaanse Padvindsters Gilde
- Het Arubaanse Padvindsters Gilde (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No secondary sourcing--and none that I can't find. Google News offers nothing but Facebook and Wikipedia (GNews, how you have fallen), but there's nothing else I can find, not in the regular search and not in books. It's unfortunate but not all scouting organizations are notable per
) 01:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)- Comment: Secondary sources exist (eg [1], [2], [3]), but both my Dutch and my Papiamento skills aren't good enough to include them. The little I understand suggests at least national notability. --jergen (talk) 09:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Caribbean. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
ClanLib
- ClanLib (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nothing in the article suggests this meets
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:09, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: @Piotrus:, are you asserting that what the article purports to be full chapters in two different game programming books doesn't amount to SIGCOV? I don't have access to or know these sources, so maybe you know something not obvious from the description here. ~ A412 talk! 08:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- @A412 I did not realize the second one is a book (dead link, all refs are malformatted and don't suggest they are books). The third one does link to a book page but I could not verify the contents (it is just publisher page). I also remain unconvinced that coverage in how-to/textbooks is sufficient to prove something is notable, unless those books are widely used. There is a lot of low quality spammy how-to/textbooks in the computer sciences field, particularly now in the AI days (although those works are likely old enough to at least not be AI creations). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: "Game Programming with Python, Lua, and Ruby" does indeed have a chapter on it, although I can't access the full text, unsure about the other one. There seems to be some decent sources in Google Books and some in Scholar. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 18:11, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- @StreetcarEnjoyer Is the publisher (Premier Press)? Their website suggests they do print-on-demand stuff, so self-publishing. See [4] or Our work helps you achieve your marketing goals.. Assuming this is the right company, this one does a lot of non-book gadget printing?? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Alright, Amazon lists pub as Course Technology PTR, a subsiduary of Cengage Group. Course Technology PTR has Premier Press as an imprint. While I'm fairly confident who the publisher is, I can't say whether or not there's editorial control. @Piotrus I suspect you have an unrelated Premier Press website there, by the looks of it they're not in educational publishing. ~ A412 talk! 02:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Here's some stuff I found if you'd like to look at it and decide upon its reliability. [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 16:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- @StreetcarEnjoyer Is the publisher (Premier Press)? Their website suggests they do print-on-demand stuff, so self-publishing. See [4] or Our work helps you achieve your marketing goals.. Assuming this is the right company, this one does a lot of non-book gadget printing?? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Just a comment: List of games built with ClanLib: https://web.archive.org/web/20060626025824/http://www.clanlib.org/games.html - all of them seems to be hobby projects or even learning projects. I doubt that any of that on it's own would have Wikipedia article. Quickly looking at the list I do not see anything commercial or noteworthy. Pbm (talk) 08:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More participation needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 14:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 15:08, 24 April 2024 (UTC)- Yeah I would personally delete it. Looking for useful game engines and this page wasted my time. 24.113.50.192 (talk) 09:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- A link to the website perhaps from its entry on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_game_engines since that's how I ended up here. 24.113.50.192 (talk) 09:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- WP:SIGCOV. Industrial Insect (talk)18:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- A link to the website perhaps from its entry on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_game_engines since that's how I ended up here. 24.113.50.192 (talk) 09:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah I would personally delete it. Looking for useful game engines and this page wasted my time. 24.113.50.192 (talk) 09:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Just some thoughts. I remember ClanLib. Back in the day, it was a 'big thing' for GNU/Linux users. At the time, Pingus was one of its showcase projects. Eventually, late 2007, Pingus switched to SDL. But early on, both gained popularity as SEUL(-supported) projects. Pingus still has its website there, and starting 19 July 2003 ClanLib was hosted there. I agree that ClanLib is not - or, no longer - notable enough to have its own article on Wikipedia, but perhaps it could get a single sentence at Video games and Linux § 1998–2002. Then the ClanLib article could redirect there. --62.166.252.25 (talk) 17:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Pashtunistan conflict
- Pashtunistan conflict (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Already mentioned in similar page of Afghanistan-Pakistan border skirmishes, page isn't distinguishable for WP:GNG and is mostly background information rather then any relevant information about a major invasion.
The sources are also extremely lacking/poor, many being blog sites. Noorullah (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Afghanistan and Pakistan. Noorullah (talk) 23:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Military. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Check it out brother, now it's completely rebranded and is far more notable than it was, I gave more conflicts and stuff like that talk) 07:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Check it out brother, now it's completely rebranded and is far more notable than it was, I gave more conflicts and stuff like that
- Okay I'll give more information about the invasion and I think it's pretty notable enough to have it's own page talk) 04:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- By renaming the article and changing the topic To Pashtunistan conflict the scope of article has changed, the article has known importance about the history of confrontation's between both countries, it should be given time as this requires a lot of work and hence shouldn't be deleted. Rahim231 (talk) 13:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:48, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: This article doesn't meet the a collection of unrelated events thrown together to create an article on a subject that isn't connected to the events discussed. Additionally, the author changed the page's title from its original one to a completely different title after the AFD was initiated. This suggests uncertainty about which title is appropriate for the content, indicating doubt about the notability of the original title. They then shifted the article to a new title, perhaps in an attempt to establish notability under a different name. Sheriff | ☎ 911| 15:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)- Merge to Afghanistan–Pakistan border skirmishes, as per nomination. Samoht27 (talk) 16:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Should all the Pakistan India skirmishes be merged into one, perhaps not it was the first round of skirmishes, second one was bajaur campaign , third one during soviet Afghan war and this is the fourth round on which the article is about, so I think it shouldn't be Waleed (talk) 12:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Bubble laser
- Bubble laser (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Classic example of
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 04:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The WP:NTEMPTherefore, I believe there is no need for a year-long wait as you suggest, because the subject meets the GNG. I will substantiate that below:
- This topic has recieved significant coverage (full-length articles) in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. These include:
- "Bubble lasers can be sturdy and sensitive" in Physics Today, a publication of the American Institute of Physics
- "A Soap Bubble Becomes a Laser" in Physics magazine, by the American Physical Society
- "Soap bubbles transform into lasers" in Physics World by the Institute of Physics (UK)
- "Tiny lasers can be made from soap bubbles" in New Scientist
- I believe that these sources provide "true evidence of notability" as specified in the GNG. I don't think there are extra subject-specific criteria that would apply to this article. HenryMP02 (talk) 05:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, you are citing popular science articles not full fledged referred articles. If there were 30 arXiv by others already then that would indicate that the scientific community considered it valid and notable, without that it is classic ) 05:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Draftify, there is just one scientific article and several pop science retellings of it, and it's too soon, as already mentioned, to establish its notability. Artem.G (talk) 19:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Why doesn't WP:GNG apply to the topic? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Answered my own question, WP:SUSTAINED should be satisfied here. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 17:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Answered my own question,
- Why doesn't
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Reformed fundamentalism
- Reformed fundamentalism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is an ill-defined religious "movement". I doubt anyone identifies themselves as a Reformed fundamentalist. That's not necessarily fatal, but makes it harder to identify what the group is. You can google "Reformed fundamentalism" and find lots of hits, but many of them will be using it as a pejorative and foil for something else. I think it is possible that a phenomenon called "Reformed fundamentalism" exists as something that could be defined using reliable independent sources, but it would be difficult and this article does not even begin to attempt it. I think the current
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the term is in use in the scholarly literature. The page may well need work but I'm not sure it is bad enough for ) 09:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - it really is a thing - particularly with the Bible Presbyterian Church and the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster - but the article isn't very good. StAnselm (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. It looks like this might close as No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
2023 Little Rock tornado
- 2023 Little Rock tornado (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article was not at all ready for mainspace and it currently fails
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Environment, and Arkansas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Move back to draft Why didn't you just move back to draft? This was unnecessary. ChessEric 06:16, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- @TNT method (i.e. delete it and then redo it in userspace). Heck, the whole thing as it is right now is a copy/paste from the outbreak article so in 5 seconds, I could redo it in userspace. So yeah, don't think of this AfD as a true "delete it due to lack of notability", but more of a TNT request that is also using notability and the dang copyright and copy/paste issues as the backing for that TNT request. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)06:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's why you should have just put it in draft and rewritten or paraphrased some of it. Plus, the event details are fine and the section on the main page can be shortened. Plus, believe it or not, the SOCKS have actually made some helpful edits. The AfD was not the way to go. Plus, this tornado inflicted significant damage along its path in a major metropolitan area, so I think it will easily meet 13:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don’t doubt that and again, I’m not saying this won’t get an article. For reference this entire edit is a copyright violation. Making it a draft again will not get rid of that. The SOCk reverted edit is also a copyright violation, as both are just a copy/paste of another Wikipedia article without any reference that content came from another article. That could be easily solved with an inter-wiki link, but it just makes the edit history weird and talk page weird. Legit, the history itself needs to be TNTed and then as this is at this point a near 100% direct copy/paste, I could create User:WeatherWriter/2023 Little Rock tornado with a copy/paste of the damage summary and basically restart the whole thing before the SOCKs came along. Did they help? Sure. Did they save maybe 5 minutes of work only though? Yes. It is better to literally TNT this, get rid of the copyright violation and just restart. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:00, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Doing a courtesy ping for WP:TNT to remove the SOCKs from play. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)14:18, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Doing a courtesy ping for
- I don’t doubt that and again, I’m not saying this won’t get an article. For reference this entire edit is a copyright violation. Making it a draft again will not get rid of that. The SOCk reverted edit is also a copyright violation, as both are just a copy/paste of another Wikipedia article without any reference that content came from another article. That could be easily solved with an inter-wiki link, but it just makes the edit history weird and talk page weird. Legit, the history itself needs to be TNTed and then as this is at this point a near 100% direct copy/paste, I could create User:WeatherWriter/2023 Little Rock tornado with a copy/paste of the damage summary and basically restart the whole thing before the SOCKs came along. Did they help? Sure. Did they save maybe 5 minutes of work only though? Yes. It is better to literally TNT this, get rid of the copyright violation and just restart. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:00, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's why you should have just put it in draft and rewritten or paraphrased some of it. Plus, the event details are fine and the section on the main page can be shortened. Plus, believe it or not, the SOCKS have actually made some helpful edits. The AfD was not the way to go. Plus, this tornado inflicted significant damage along its path in a major metropolitan area, so I think it will easily meet 13:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- @
Redirect to the section inSOCK) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)14:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)Due to the copyright violations as mentioned above, we could either do a delete and redirect closure, orSOCK) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)14:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For some laundry-free discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'm confused by the nominator's stance here. You state "Either delete or draftify back like it was" but in the discussion comments, it looks like you are arguing against a move to Draft space. Please be clearer because if draftifying (to any previous version) is acceptable, then we can close this AFD discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
As per usual, WeatherWriter is endlessly yapping about irrelevant crap that makes the discussion impossibly hard to follow. His rants can be found in numerous AFDs and discussions, such asSOCK strikethrough.) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)14:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)- Comment I just semi'ed it so we reach a consensus without socks. I have relisted this but don't consider myself involved. Star Mississippi 00:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any thoughts from more independent editors?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 05:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Installer VISE
- Installer VISE (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article does not align with the English Wikipedia's criteria for both
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Articles that have been proposed for deletion cannot be soft deleted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 18:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)- Comment Shadow311 you relisted this saying that articles that have been proposed for deletion cannot be soft deleted, yet this exact soft deletion has already happened for two other articles for which the deletion has been proposed by the exact same user: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EMCO MSI Package Builder and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zero Install, so how is it at the end of the day?!? Thanks! --Vlad|->
- @Vlad: We're at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, which is different from Wikipedia:Proposed deletion.
CommentKeep - After looking at the nominator's edit history, I'm a little worried that there is some sort of vendetta, ulterior motives or conflict of interest going on here where aside from creating a couple of Armenian articles this editor appears to just be trying to delete installation technology-related articles. Many of the articles that the nominator has suggested for deletion have been on Wikipedia for many years - in the case of the WiX article (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WiX) it must rank among the oldest articles having been started in 2004, so my question is why are these all being nominated for deletion all of a sudden? TubularWorld (talk) 13:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 19:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Strong keep. It is easy to find independent ) 00:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any suggestions in keeping this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 06:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)- I've changed my vote to keep after having done a little more research into this software (and added a few things to the article). It appears that this was quite popular 20 something years ago, even to the point that Apple themselves distributed their own software using it. TubularWorld (talk) 09:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
KRLB-LD
- KRLB-LD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Christianity, and Washington. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Enough SIGCOV in Tri-Cities paper. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 23:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Michele Fitzgerald
- Michele Fitzgerald (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notable for only winning
) 01:45, 7 April 2024 (UTC)- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Television, and New Jersey. George Ho (talk) 01:45, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
02:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I think more independent reliable source are needed.--Meligirl5 (talk) 09:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- How do independent reliable sources make BLP1E or BIO1E inapplicable? Even meeting ) 09:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- I clearly understood she was only notable because she won in a notable event. But I can’t say delete or keep because the biography tells more than just the notable event but fails providing sources to meet ) 11:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)- Oppose deletion because of her performance in both of her Survivor seasons, but I agree more independent reliable sources are needed. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 20:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Meligirl5 and JohnAdams1800: What are your thoughts on redirecting the article to Survivor: Kaôh Rōng, an alternative to deletion? George Ho (talk) 20:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Draftify I would suggest the article should be move to draft space, since she seems to be notable for a particular event but fails
) 14:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC)HTML-Kit
- HTML-Kit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't have enough coverage in
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Software. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: The prior AfD (which was long enough ago that it was actually a VfD) is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HTML Kit; the article was renamed a few months after that nomination. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Because of prior deletion discussion, a Soft Deletion is not an option here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Usual software fluffery. Unreferenced since 2005. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Pretoria Wireless Users Group
- Pretoria Wireless Users Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I was unable to find any mention of this organization anywhere, hence seems to fail
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and South Africa. Allan Nonymous (talk) 04:16, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC)04:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to South African wireless community networks as ATD. There is a plausible claim of notability in the article but I can’t find sources to support it. Mccapra (talk) 11:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
La alta escuela
- La alta escuela (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I couldn't find sources to show they meet
) 08:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Spain. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - I have found 4 citations and added to the article, including one from Vice. The reliability of VICE is questionable per WP:MUSICBIO, which says "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city."RolandSimon (talk) 03:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 11:00, 21 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 07:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Maldives–Switzerland relations
- Maldives–Switzerland relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
3 of the 4 sources are primary. The 4th is not indepth. Not much interaction besides diplomatic recognition. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Maldives, and Switzerland. LibStar (talk) 10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I think this kind of article is on the edge of what we'd accept for pretty much any minor village that has its own entry here. It's factual, there are sources and, who knows, should something substantial happen then we'll have the backbone for the entry (a cursory search shows that there have been, in fact, discussions on these specific bilateral relations in the past). Superboilles (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. There's not much here; not enough for a stand-alone article. The French-language news article noted above is not enough to constitute WP:SIGCOV of this topic. Yilloslime (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 15:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)- Delete: Fails talk | contributions) 18:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
List of French words of English origin
- List of French words of English origin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Wikipedia is
I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
- List of French words of Gaulish origin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of French words of Germanic origin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of French words of Germanic origin (A-B) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of French words of Germanic origin (C-G) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of French words of Germanic origin (H–Z) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
PepperBeast (talk) 22:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and France. PepperBeast (talk) 22:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Do you think it would be a good idea to move it to Wiktionary instead? Obviously these articles have value, so I think we should retain them, but in the other wiki. איתן קרסנטי (talk) 06:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not familiar enough with Wiktionary policies to have an opinion. PepperBeast (talk) 12:24, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)- Mae yr erthygl hon yn cynnwys llawer o eiriau sydd yn debyg iawn i eiriau Cymraeg (sydd hefyd yn iaith Geltaidd) sydd ddim yn dod o eiriau Lladin na Saesneg. Felly rydw i yn sicr ei fod yn adnodd pwysig iawn i'w chadw fel cofnod o eiriau Ffrangeg sydd yn dod o hen iaith Gaul, felly dylai gael ei chadw er mwyn ei phwysicrwydd. Nid yn unig oherwydd diwylliant Ffrangeg, ond y ddiwylliant Geltaidd sydd yn gorchuddio llawer o Orllewin Ewrop, yn cynnwys Sbaen, Y Wlad Belg, Y Swisdir, Gogledd Yr Eidal, a Gorllewin a De'r Almaen. Wrth ddileu'r dudalen hon, rydym yn dileu darn pwysig o'n hanes a'n diwylliant.
- This article contains many words that are very similar to Welsh words (which is also a Celtic language) which do not come from Latin or English. Therefore I am certain it is a very important resource to be kept as a record of French and Celtic words that come from the old language of Gaul, so should be kept because of its importance. Not only for its importance in French heritage, but also for Celtic heritage which spans most of Western Europe, including Spain, Belgium, Switzerland, the North of Italy, and the West and South of Germany. Gareth ap Emyr (talk) 21:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Well, it's Euro-centric. The Academie Francaise isn't representative of French in Quebec, the Office de la Langue Francaise sets suggestions for Quebec French, which is mostly what we use here in Canada. This would need a rewrite for a more global view and most of this is unsourced. There's something here, but I'm not sure even a draft would fix this. Oaktree b (talk) 00:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
If we were to delete this one, we'd also have to delete all similar articles, and there's a lot (five just for the lists of English of French origin). I've never encountered such lists on the Wiktionary, but it would indeed maybe make more sense to have these there. But in the end it wouldn't make any major difference. Ulysse Verjus-Tonnelé (talk) 01:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Nevermind they do exist on Wiktionary actually! https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_terms_derived_from_French Ulysse Verjus-Tonnelé (talk) 01:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Same for French words https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:French_terms_derived_from_English Ulysse Verjus-Tonnelé (talk) 01:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the opening context and various ancillary information are not adequately covered by the relevant Wiktionary categories. It is desirable to expand these articles into something like Influence of French on English which is an encyclopedic discussion of the topic and not just a list, but these lists are better than nothing and better than a link to a Wiktionary category. Eluchil404 (talk) 03:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet to take any particular action with this bundled nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete To be honest I'd just delete the lot of them, these seem too niche to be of interest here, without some further scholarly discussion around these words, which seem to be missing from the article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Draftify per @Eluchil404:'s recommendation of expanding the article to be similar to Influence of French on English. It has problems with the way it's currently written, but it isn't unrecoverable. Ships & Space(Edits) 01:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. No consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
A-Plus (rapper)
- A-Plus (rapper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Music. Nagol0929 (talk) 15:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I haven't looked closely yet as to whether his article deserves to stay, but it seems to me a redirect to WP:XY may be considered here, but Hieroglyphics is all of Souls of Michief plus four other people, so he's still a part of Hieroglyphics as a member of Souls of Mischief. Richard3120 (talk) 16:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Colorado. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: He clearly passes WP:NMUSIC#C6 if he's part of two notable production groups. That doesn't mean we have to have a standalone article on him, just noting a discrepancy in the nom statement. Mach6120:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep or merge to Souls of Mischief as he does have some individual reliable sources coverage such as an AllMusic staff bio here and a review of one of his 3 solo albums here, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Delete Other than the 2 sources provided by above editor, there are not enough reliable coverage and 2 of the sources are interviews.Bradelykooper (talk) 08:34, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 16:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect. None of the sources appear to be reliable, but a search of his name would go to the band's article, a compromise that we do sometimes. Bearian (talk) 14:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 18:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)- @Bearian: AllMusic is a reliable source as per [[13]] and the bio and album review are not interviews as someone else claimed, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Atlantic306: the only problem is that AllMusic isn’t being used as a reference and all 3 of the references are interviews. Of those only 1 is about A-Plus. Nagol0929 (talk) 03:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Have added the AllMusic sources as references, Atlantic306 (talk) 14:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Atlantic306: the only problem is that AllMusic isn’t being used as a reference and all 3 of the references are interviews. Of those only 1 is about A-Plus. Nagol0929 (talk) 03:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Bearian: AllMusic is a reliable source as per [[13]] and the bio and album review are not interviews as someone else claimed, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep There's a ton of sourcing (yes, from reliable sources) available on this guy in Google News and Books searches, over a period of decades. It's true that most of them are brief mentions, but with all of the info available, surely the article could be built out and sourced better than it is now. I had to get a little creative in looking for sources since "A plus" is such a generic term, but combining his name with "Hieroglyphics" or "Souls of Mischief" yields many good results. Fred Zepelin (talk) 19:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Fred Zepelin may you link said results? Mach61 01:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Imre Vallyon
- Imre Vallyon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
As per the notability guidelines for authors, an author is notable if: The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. The person's work (or works) either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
None of the preceding apply in this case and almost all the sources in the article are not independent. There are almost no reviews of his work and the awards he has won are not notable. The only significant coverage is of his legal issues. Ynsfial (talk) 15:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Spirituality, Hungary, and New Zealand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:29, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, the Stuff article certainly establishes that he's notable, although the focus of it is on his child molestation convictions. The award from the Ashton Wylie Charitable Trust might be notable given that it's in conjunction with the New Zealand Society of Authors, which is definitely notable.-Gadfium (talk) 22:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how the Stuff article establishes his notability as an author. It's mostly about his convictions as you said. I'm struggling to find any reviews or analysis of his work. Even if the award is given in conjunction with the NZSA I don't think it's enough to confer notability. Do you think it is? It might also be worth noting that Vallyon himself is a member of the New Zealand Society of Authors, a membership he pays for.~~~ Ynsfial (talk) 12:49, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Gadfium is not arguing that he is notable as an author. Gadfium is talking about GNG. Schwede66 17:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- I misunderstood, sorry. What other sources do we have for GNG then? We would need multiple. Will we be establishing his notability as a criminal if not as an author? or as a spiritual guru and leader? The only significant coverage in general seems to be that Stuff article, which focuses on his history of sexual assault. It's not unusual for a local newspaper to cover local criminals and crimes.
- The article consists of primarily sourced biographical information, a list of books with no analysis or reviews and a mention of a minor prize. If we were to remove the Scoop article, a local paper detailing his criminal convictions, what would his notability be based on GNG or otherwise? Ynsfial (talk) 22:15, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Gadfium is not arguing that he is notable as an author. Gadfium is talking about GNG. Schwede66 17:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how the Stuff article establishes his notability as an author. It's mostly about his convictions as you said. I'm struggling to find any reviews or analysis of his work. Even if the award is given in conjunction with the NZSA I don't think it's enough to confer notability. Do you think it is? It might also be worth noting that Vallyon himself is a member of the New Zealand Society of Authors, a membership he pays for.~~~ Ynsfial (talk) 12:49, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 18:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Source 6 is a book review in a RS, this in a Seattle newspaper discusses the author and his work [14], should be at basic notability. Discussed here [15] in a RS from New Zealand. Oaktree b (talk) 22:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't consider Horror News Net a reliable source, see How to Get Your Book or Comic Reviewed on (HNN) Horrornews.net? and How to Expedite your Film Review? Their About us states:
- "HNN simply is a means for your film, product, book or studio to have existence on the internet. Whether bad or good, a product without existence in the search engines is simply without relevance. You work hard to create something, while we work hard to create a site that provides existence for your items."
- It's used as a reference on dozens if not hundreds of articles, so this should be brought up on the WP:RSN.
- The review in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer is a republished one from Blogcritics. Archived discussions on WP:RSN seem to indicate that it hasn't really been considered reliable the times it was brought up since it seems to accept content from any blogger. The website's About us states:
- "Blogcritics gives writers the opportunity to gain an exponentially higher level of visibility (and thus, traffic and search rank) than they could ever achieve through their home blog or website alone." Mooonswimmer 01:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't consider Horror News Net a reliable source, see How to Get Your Book or Comic Reviewed on (HNN) Horrornews.net? and How to Expedite your Film Review? Their About us states:
- Delete Lacks WP:GNG, but it's all I could find. The two awards he's won are minor and of debatable notability. Mooonswimmer03:18, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
George John Seaton
- George John Seaton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No evidence of notability. All the significant sources dealing with the topic are written by the subject. All others simply reference background story and not the subject. Fails
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Africa, France, England, and South America. Velella Velella Talk 15:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Delete- as well as the lack of notability, the whole thing reads like a school essay. Or maybe from a chat-bot. This is highlighted by the following comment in the lede: "This article explores George John Seaton's life as a prisoner, slave, and man. It will include researched documentation as well as information from his personal book, Isle of the Damned, to piece together the story of this man's intriguing life."--Gronk Oz (talk) 12:25, 6 April 2024 (UTC)- It reads like a school essay because the person who wrote the article, Jeorgiaobrien, is a university student who made it for an assignment. Just putting that out there in case anyone else who comes across this doesn't know. Sadustu Tau (talk) 15:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- I propose moving the article into the draftspace. As the user above noted, this is part of a student assignment, in which first-year college students are grappling with understanding the differences between primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. The article was prematurely moved to the mainspace and correctly flagged—but it can be turned into a feasible Wikipedia article because there is a relevant source base.
- Seaton’s notability primarily arises from the extensive reception of his autobiography, which occurred in two waves: 1) initial reception upon publication in the early 1950s, around the time Devil's Island ceased operations as a penal colony, by a largely Anglophone public and 2) the use of his autobiographical account in the contemporary historiography on French Guiana and related topics that reach from the treatment of prisoners across the French Empire to examples of queer sexuality during incarceration. In short, given that there is only a limited number of prisoners’ own accounts from their time in French Guiana (some of which have further been debunked as hoaxes), Seaton’s autobiography has become a standard historical source among scholars—and he, by extension, a model prisoner of sorts.
- I have advised the student to make the necessary edits to turn this article into a proper encyclopedic essay, and to restructure it around the significance of his autobiography, which can be properly verified with secondary sources. We would appreciate it if she received the opportunity to make these edits in the draftspace. Outcasts&Outlaws (talk) 17:08, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - as nominator, I have no problem with this being moved back to Draft. I would have done so myself had there not already been a Draft in existnce preventing the new version being draftified. It will therefore need an Admin to do the draftification. However, I or any other editor, will still have be convinced by the sourcing that this person is indeed notable and not simply a self publicist, before accepting it in Mainspace. Velella Velella Talk 17:29, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - I am the author of this article. I am continuously working on the article, so it meets the notability requirements. There are no longer any direct quotes from Seaton's autobiography and any wording that may sound like an essay has been removed. Here is a list of secondary sources that speak directly of Seaton and are sourced throughout the article: Negros with Slaves by Jet Magazine, Words of the Week by Jet Magazine, Space in the Tropics by Peter Redfield (University of California Press), and Empire of the Underworld (Harvard University Press). Jeorgiaobrien (talk) 16:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- As I have been working on improving the article, there are now over 10 new sources that are all secondary sources and relate to George John Seaton. I have implemented many changes including formatting, word choice, and the removal of any primary source quotes. Please review this article once again. If you have more improvements you would like me to make, please visit my talk page. I will be happy to continue to make changes. After reviewing the article, if it meets notability requirements then I would love for this article to no longer be flagged for deletion. I am doing my best to follow Wikipedia's guidelines while also sharing a story of a man who should be remembered. Jeorgiaobrien (talk) 03:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Change !vote to Keep - the changes described above tip the scales (just) in my opinion. I would still like to see the article's tone cleaned up to fix unsupported phrases like "notoriously one of the worst penal colonies of its time", "if imprisonment didn't kill a prisoner, then disease would", etc. and to spend less space discussing Papillon in two different sections. But I think this can be done in place rather that draftifying. --Gronk Oz (talk) 05:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - From a brief look at this article and its references, perhaps it could be retitled Isle of the Damned and be restructured to be about the book/s Isles and Scars - their reviews and reception, use by University of Michigan, comparisons, censorship, etc? It would of course include a potted bio of Seaton. Is there enough for ) 07:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback. I will speak with my professor about the suggestion and consider your idea. Best wishes, Jeorgiaobrien (talk) 15:50, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. This article has basically been rewritten over the past two weeks and we have an unbolded "Keep" from the article creator. I'd like to hear from others, especially the nominator, whether these changes made to the article affect your point of view of what should happen with it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment as the nominator, I still remain uncertain about notability. As indicated above, I would be content with draftification to allow for improvement. I don't have access to any of the sources added during the recent major revision, but from their context it appears that the content of the book has been used in historical analysis both about the prison and its treatment of prisoners and other topics. Had this article been about the book, this may well have been sufficiet to demonstrate notability, but since , in this case, notability dependends on demonstrating multiple reliable sources that discuss the subject, I cannot be sure that that has been achieved, especially as most of the claims to notability are bundled into a single short paragraph at the end. Those with access to the quoted sources may possibly disagree, in which case I would be content to defer to their better understanding. Velella Velella Talk 22:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I understand your uncertainty about the article's notability but the changes you first requested when you flagged my article for deletion have since been implemented. As for the accessibility of sources, nearly all of these sources come from publications made by recognized universities or from google books, etc. You should not have trouble accessing these sources if you wish to learn more. The only sources you may have trouble retrieving are the sources pulled from my university's archives. However, being that we are a research university, it is possible to access these upon reaching out to the university.
- We did in fact leave out any claim that Seaton's book is credible. This is because the book is not being used as a source in the article but is instead just being referenced. My professor and I felt that it was more scholarly to explain how the book has been used in case studies rather than trying to persuade readers that the book is credible.
- From your comment, it seems that your biggest issue with the article is the uncertainty that the sources are referencing Seaton himself. Most of these sources do speak directly of Seaton and were published after devil's island was closed in 1953. Seaton gained popularity for surviving the island which led to news coverage of him. These articles are all sourced in the article and as mentioned above they are public access if you wish to find them.
- As the nominator, please give specific examples of what you would like changed in order to ensure notability and I will do so. I want to once again emphasize that nearly all of these sources can be accessed by the public and are available online. This can reassure you that subject matter is being reported on directly and not the context surrounding him. Jeorgiaobrien (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment from a leaning-towards-a-Delete-!vote contributor: What's with the numerous assignments in academic institutions for students to "create a Wikipedia article"? Since when Wikipedia's criteria for article creation are the same as the criteria for academic papers? Such a practice endangers the objectivity of contributors evaluating the text as worthy of being in the encyclopaedia. I, for one, would perhaps hesitate to !vote for Deletion if that means the student's grading suffers! And we are essentially asked to do a supervising professor's job, when we assess a student's work.
- P.S. As it happens, I find the subject lacking in independent ) 14:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hello. I am the creator of this article. As mentioned, I am a university student, and by no means an expert in writing encyclopedias. However, our class carefully trained with a Wikipedia representative from the Wikipedia Education Foundation (a group focused on building articles made by students). As well as help from our professor, who has a PhD in the topic, helped curate and edit our articles to meet Wikipedia standards. Since there has been issues with my particular article being granted publishing rights, she has stepped in to help me tremendously hoping to make this article go live.
- Overall, our class is simply trying to share the stories of people who have been othered in history. A few of my sources are pulled from the University Library and Library Archives at Washington University in St. Louis. However, the rest of the sources are all available online and should be accessible to the public. I am unsure why accessing the sources has been an issue. Many of these sources have public access from esteemed Universities and others are published on google books, etc.
- The original nomination for deletion was made due to the use of a primary source. This information has since been removed. My professor and I have added multiple new sources that are accessible through online databases and take the place of the primary source. As mentioned by the nominator (User:Velella), there is less emphasis on the book's notability. This was done on purpose, as we felt it was more scholarly to give facts about how the autobiography by Seaton has been used as case studies for prisons and prisoner homosexuality versus trying to make a biased claim that the book is credible. We also thought that including the credibility of the book was irrelevant to the article because there is no source usage of the book in the article any longer.
- I would love more feedback for what changes you think this article may need. My class ends very quickly so I am hoping to have an article that is able to go live. Thanks. Jeorgiaobrien (talk) 20:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Was notable even before the new sources were added. Desertarun (talk) 17:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- As the creator of this page, thank you for your vote to keep! Jeorgiaobrien (talk) 19:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I think notability is established by improvements, and I don't see how the purely autobiographical works could themselves be notable if their subject is not. BD2412 T 03:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- As the creator of this page, thank you for your vote to keep! Jeorgiaobrien (talk) 19:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Recent sentiment has been pointing towards keeping this article, but with some questions still being discussed regarding notability/sourcing etc. An extra 7 days can't hurt to shore up consensus either way.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
WCKV-LD
- WCKV-LD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 06:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Tennessee. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 06:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to 17:41, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Subject has enough coverage to meet the ) 01:25, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to state list That's not SIGCOV. That's mostly regurgitated press releases. About the only substantive fact I learned was that this was once a ) 23:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 08:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Sports broadcasting contracts in Vietnam
- Sports broadcasting contracts in Vietnam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Vietnam. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
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, Liz Read! Talk! 07:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)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, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails NLIST no indication this has been discussed as a group, meets LISTCRUFT, there is nothing encyclopedic here. // Timothy :: talk 22:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Wikipedia isn't a TV guide. This fails to meet the ) 14:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Mask Bloc
- Mask Bloc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I don't believe these groups meet the notability criteria for organisations, there is limited in-depth coverage of the phenomena. This is too soon for this to be an article, and borderline promotional of the advocacy group. JeffUK 06:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and COVID-19. JeffUK 06:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's not a group its more like an organizing tactic similar to Black Blocs and I don't see how its too soon as the covid pandemic is an ongoing situation and had an article as soon as it was named. The article is important information for an ongoing pandemic I don't see why it would be deleted. Wikibobdobbs (talk) 06:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)- I strongly disagree with the suggestion of removing this article, and I'm confused as to how it can be justified, given that the movement is very much an active (and growing) one. I'm currently beginning research on this specific form of mutual aid as part of my postgraduate dissertation, and while the article needs to be cleaned up for consistent formatting, etc., there is no reason (other than a "political" objection to masking) to remove this at present, even if the information is under-reported. This is "grey literature," essentially. MAINShorebird (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Sports broadcasting contracts in Canada
- Sports broadcasting contracts in Canada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Canada. SpacedFarmer (talk) 14:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports broadcasting contracts in the United States. 162 etc. (talk) 21:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- I cannot see how a bunch of news announcments make a subject notable. Keep? Look at the state of this? Almost everything is unsourced. Tells you the low-quality state of Wikipedia. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment, I found [18], [19], and [20], which may help determine notabilty. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails NLIST no indication this has been discussed as a group, meets LISTCRUFT, there is nothing encyclopedic here. // Timothy :: talk 22:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Sabado Barkada
- Sabado Barkada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Tagged as unreferenced since 2009 but was actually unreferenced since 2006. No good hits on GNews and GBooks. GNews archives only turned out two ads related to it.
) 02:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. Lenticel (talk) 02:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
University of Colorado Physical Therapy Program
- University of Colorado Physical Therapy Program (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Despite being a large article, it appears to have been mostly edited by COI editors and contains
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Education, United States of America, and Colorado. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 01:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:19, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect - and selectively merge any content with reliable independent sources to University of Colorado School of Medicine. As the nominating editor stated, article seems promo and lacks secondary sources. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 01:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hello Eejit43, thank you for the valuable feedback! I am presently retrieving outside sources to backup the information presented in this article. I am aware of the problem of promotion of interests on WP and how many hide their identity. My hope is that being transparent will help, along with the pending external citations that will demonstrate impact and notability both locally and nationally. Mikepascoe (talk) 13:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hello all,
- An initial draft of the article had 31 cuanschutz.edu (internal) sources + 23 external (independent) sources = 54 total.
- The present version now has 19 internal + 42 external source = 61 total.
- The percentage of sources from the university website (Eejit43's original comment) has decreased from 57% to 31%.
- Further improvements can be made, thank you for your continued review
- Mikepascoe (talk) 14:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I'm not really seeing any SIGCOV from secondary sources. A selective merge might still be the best way forward.-KH-1 (talk) 04:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, could you please explain what a selective merge is and how this is a good way forward?
- I'm also not sure how to satisfy the SIGCOV (significant coverage?) requirement. There are several external sources discussing the Program now from refutable sources. Do you have an example of a source that meets SIGCOV from other Wikipedia articles?
- Thank you very much! Mikepascoe (talk) 16:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus. It would also help if an editor(s) would address User:Mikepascoe's valid questions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
French exonyms
- French exonyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Wikipedia is
- List of French exonyms for Dutch toponyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of French exonyms for German toponyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- List of French exonyms for Italian toponyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
PepperBeast (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Geography, Lists, and Europe. PepperBeast (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as -- 14:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep this was just closed as no consensus a couple weeks ago, and has been re-nominated by the same nominator. Definitely a 18:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- > just closed as no consensus a couple weeks ago
- That's... that's the point of re-nominating. To... create consensus where it wasn't possible to do so before. BrigadierG (talk) 18:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- No, the mass deletion of all exonym listicles failed to reach consensus, so they are now listed separately. —Tamfang (talk) 19:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oh. Well, that's still ridiculous then. The UN has a working group specifically on French exonyms, as does the French government, showing this is a valid encyclopedic topic. I don't know how any of you are getting to 19:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Well, an article on the working group might be interesting. But how is an endless list of French words for places more worthy than a list of French words for spices or engine parts? —Tamfang (talk) 20:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- or Bosnian names of primate families —Tamfang (talk) 02:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- In that link, the author refers to the project as an attempt to create a database. Sure would be a shame if there was a policy called WP:NOTDATABASE. BrigadierG (talk) 20:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- This isn't a database, though, it's a valid WP:LIST. SportingFlyer T·C 22:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- In most of our lists, most of the entries have their own articles. Is there any prospect of an article about the French word for Bangkok? —Tamfang (talk) 22:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- WP:NLIST specifically says the entries in the list do not need to be notable enough for their own article, just that the group or set is notable. A simple Google scholar search lends more credibility to the fact this set is notable, such as [21] [22] [23], including (but not linking here) two articles on French exonyms for Polish place names. SportingFlyer T·C23:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- In most of our lists, most of the entries have their own articles. Is there any prospect of an article about the French word for Bangkok? —Tamfang (talk) 22:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- This isn't a database, though, it's a valid WP:LIST. SportingFlyer T·C 22:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Well, an article on the working group might be interesting. But how is an endless list of French words for places more worthy than a list of French words for spices or engine parts? —Tamfang (talk) 20:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oh. Well, that's still ridiculous then. The UN has a working group specifically on French exonyms, as does the French government, showing this is a valid encyclopedic topic. I don't know how any of you are getting to 19:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- … I meant to add: no consensus because not all such listicles are equally trivial, i.e., some do more than belabor the obvious fact that each language adapts foreign words (including placenames) to its own phonology and orthography. —Tamfang (talk) 20:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Quite true. There was no consensus because there was simply too much in the nom for one discussion. My bad. So, I'm going back through the area in a more rational way. Re-listing when no consensus emerges is what's supposed to happen. PepperBeast (talk) 20:36, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - I agree with nominator, this is a case of WP:NOTDICTIONARY BrigadierG (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 20:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus. Please include a link to any previous AFDs concerning these articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's still notable, there are plenty of sources available, needs improvement, not deletion. SportingFlyer T·C 04:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - per 06:28, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Irie Papuni
- Irie Papuni (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, an Australian
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and Australia. JTtheOG (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep Think there's enough in the article, plus a search for a weak keep here. Draftification is a suitable WP:ATD if deemed not also .Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:40, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)