Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 December 4

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Purge server cache

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

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 13:53, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

María Díaz Cortés

María Díaz Cortés (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Time for another AfD. No sources, unremarkable longevity claim, and we're left with

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe there are not two people who outlived this claimed record now thatthe gold standard for verified claims has been researched better. [1] Legacypac (talk) 09:33, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 13:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Troy Josephs

Troy Josephs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Withdrawn. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:30, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Xu Jian

Xu Jian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails

WP:BLPPRODed it except that there's a link to the person's profile. SemiHypercube 23:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Robert McClenon: The claim was verified in the sole source that article had. I've just added another, more detailed one. -Zanhe (talk) 09:07, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 13:55, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin B. Morrison

Kevin B. Morrison (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Inadequately referenced

routine local election coverage that any newly elected county councillor anywhere could always show in their local media. To make somebody notable at the county level of political office, it's not enough to just verify that he exists -- it requires a depth and range and volume of coverage that marks him out as a special case who's significantly more notable than most other county councillors. Bearcat (talk) 22:53, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a misguided suggestion for several reasons. Most other present and former members of the 17 member Cook County Board of Commissioners, including the predecessor to this commissioner, have their own articles; not only is it the governing body for the second largest county in the United States, the districts that these members represent are larger in population than state legislative districts in Illinois. Additionally, this individual is notable for several reasons, including being the first-ever openly LGBT member of this governing body and its youngest. He has received significantly more press than other members of the body who have their own pages, which is a feat in the Chicago media market that often does not cover county commissioner races or individual commissioners. This article should be kept. Jmkp1955 (talk) 00:12, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, his predecessor has an article for being the state-level chair of an entire political party, not for being a county commissioner per se — so the fact that he has an article does not reify into an inclusion freebie for everybody else on the county council, because the county council isn't his main notability claim.
Secondly, neither being the first LGBT person to hold an otherwise non-notable office nor being the youngest person to hold an otherwise non-notable office are notability freebies either. If the office isn't a clean NPOL pass in and of itself, such as a seat in the state legislature or Congress, then his age and his membership in an underrepresented minority group aren't things that automatically make him special.
Thirdly, this article isn't showing evidence that he's "received significantly more press than other members of this body" — it's citing just two pieces of media coverage, which is not an unusual or unexpected volume. It isn't even a fraction of the sourcing that John Fritchey is citing, for example.
Fourthly, just like Tim Schneider, many of the people in
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS — if there are other articles that are equivalent to this, in that the county council is the main notability claim and the sourcing isn't showing strong evidence that they're special, then that doesn't mean this has to be kept, it means those other articles have to be deleted. We can only delete stuff if and when we catch it, so the existence of any article is never prima facie grounds for the creation of any other: each article has to directly satisfy our inclusion criteria on its own, and comparing it to any other article gets you nowhere fast. Bearcat (talk) 01:34, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:03, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Emilie Guimond-Bélanger

Emilie Guimond-Bélanger (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:22, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
  • Comment - does not seem to be notable. The only "claim to fame" seems to be "stand-in" for spokesperson. This article [[2]] dated monday 28.03.2011 seems to refer to a meeting on saturday 26.03.2011 where she was elected as spokesperson in the absence of Françoise David til she was back on August 1rst 2011. This abcense is not mentioned in the article about David or in the article about Québec solidaire. Being elected spokesperson seems to be the only element of the article that speaks for a keep. The rest of the article does not seem to show notability. regards Dyveldi ☯ prat ✉ post 16:00, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:45, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Those aren't articles about her — they just include her giving soundbite to the media in articles whose core subject is something else besides her, so they aren't notability-making coverage of her. Bearcat (talk) 23:49, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete: though I must commend Bogger's work in expanding the article, the only real coverage seems to be this source. Indeed I agree with Bearcat that the subject's commentary on news articles is not coverage of her, but of the issues she is discussing. Bilorv(c)(talk) 23:44, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 21:38, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Personally, I find it unlikely that any in-depth coverage of this person will surface in the future and I sympathize strongly with the view voiced by

AGK. However, the consensus view appears to be to keep this permastub. Randykitty (talk) 14:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Julie Goiorani

Julie Goiorani (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No

WP:TRIVIALMENTION, the other does not link to who it says [Username Needed] 12:20, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:39, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:40, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:40, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The first ref shows that she was in the squad and this link should sort it out, displaying her stats at the 2013 WC. Will add it to the article. Kante4 (talk) 13:06, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:55, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:50, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not enough !votes to generate accurate consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 21:38, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to List of supercentenarians by continent#Oldest European people ever. The consensus seems to be to merge this to the [(List of Finnish supercentenarians]]. However, as that list has been merged into List_of_supercentenarians_by_continent#Oldest European people ever, I have selected that page as merge target. Randykitty (talk) 14:19, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aarne Arvonen

Aarne Arvonen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No independent notability besides this person's reaching an advanced age. His entries on the

List of the verified oldest men and List of Finnish supercentenarians are sufficient. — JFG talk 11:01, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No objection to redirecting and writing a mini-bio on the list. — JFG talk 14:15, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:54, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In an encyclopedia? Three paragraphs is plenty long – longer than most articles in the typical printed modern encyclopedia that most of our readers still grew up with. Many articles should be 1–3 paragraphs long, in my opinion. It's what people are looking for when they just want to quickly look something up. Hiding everything in long articles is just doing the readers a disservice. Furthermore, this article is longer than the length at which our guidelines recommends starting thinking about combining it with other articles for length reasons. /Julle (talk) 17:39, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Given the lack of anything else at the list of Finnish supercenetnatrians, it seems to me that's a perfect place to put this. Not much, but enough for that. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:34, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We disagree on both points, I'm afraid. You think this article is too short; I believe this is a very good length for a Wikipedia article and that we should have more articles of roughly this length – perfect overview for an encyclopedia, and about the length (and longer!) than many articles in the classic encyclopedias of the 20th century. Not just because they were printed on paper, but also because it's a good length to give the kind of quick presentation many readers want. You think this would work well in the list; I believe that the list works better as it is and that adding a reasonably long biography in a list article where no one else has anything like it would skew the focus and make it unbalanced. /Julle (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to the finnish page. Getting old is not enough for a stand alone article. Printed encyclopedias do not and would not have wasted a paragraph on this person, so that is a red herring. Legacypac (talk) 08:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete/merge/redirect. Another obvious NOPAGE. The only facts actually about him, veteran of the Finnish Civil War of 1918 having served for the Red Guard. After the Civil War he spent a year at the Tammisaari prison camp can be presented in a list. EEng 05:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 21:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

@Randykitty: Given that Mr. Arvonen was "too young" to be included in the list of oldest Europeans, I have merged his biography to List of the verified oldest people#100 verified oldest men, on which he is #64. — JFG talk 00:20, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The List of Finnish supercentenarians was recently restored, so I moved Arvonen's mini-bio there. — JFG talk 22:04, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete.

]

Deeside Caledonia Pipe Band

Deeside Caledonia Pipe Band (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable pipe band. Ostrichyearning3 (talk) 18:49, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:13, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 21:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete.

]

Louisville Pipe Band

Louisville Pipe Band (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable pipe band. Ostrichyearning3 (talk) 18:51, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:11, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:11, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:52, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 21:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Fenix down (talk) 14:26, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmed Krenshi

talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP with no inline citations, just an external link. Fails

WP:BEFORE failed to bring up anything of note. Kirbanzo (talk) 20:30, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 23:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abneet Bharti

Abneet Bharti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nominating this page again for deletion. Obviously doesn't pass

WP:GNG
.

Going by the last time this article was nominated for deletion, it seems that User:Struway2 had some comments in regards to some of the sources listed, such as some of them linking back to a questionable source such as sportskeeda and Bharti's agent being close to the sources.

User:Aksportpro mentions that he is a very notable athlete in his home country and the country he was playing in at the time (Portugal). I doubt at all he was known in Portugal and searching for sources, it proves that he wasn't reported on much and for India, he is nowhere near the mainstream at all, especially when it comes to football. He gets a couple of articles but that isn't enough to justify notability on wikipedia. Football wise, he has yet to even be called-up to any of the India teams (youth or senior) and there is nothing about him coming to play in either the I-League or Indian Super League, our professional leagues.

Also, someone asked about football journalism in India. It isn't the best and there is a lot of agent work done in India to get headlines for their players. A few articles is nice but it shouldn't justify a page for a player. Instead, those sources should be used for the article once the player is notable. Many young Indian players get these types of articles and we can't make one for every young player that gets a full-length article. Also, reading this wikipedia article again, a lot of it sounds like a fluff piece. ArsenalFan700 (talk) 19:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Both features that are not sporskeeda are from 2014 when he was moving to Real Valladoloid. Articles are always made for Indian footballers whenever a young one goes abroad. It isn't anything groundbreaking and nothing really has been done since besides maybe a few articles here and there. Even in the features, he hasn't done anything extraordinary. He went to a Spanish youth side for a little bit before bouncing around some random European clubs but none are fully-pro. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if majority of the articles are done through his agent which wouldn't be a surprise in India. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 00:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm looking particularly at the IBT Times and Khelnow articles, and a before search shows other feature articles have been written about him in several different languages that aren't related to the sportskeeda articles. Upgrading it to Keep now I've actually done a before search. SportingFlyer talk 01:55, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly can not believe that. Khelnow isn't even a reliable source. It is a blog website and the writers are not actual journalists. Many of them come from sportskeeda. The IBT Times article is from 2014 and is just a feature about his life. How is one feature from 2014 counting for notability? Also have you looked into the content of these foreign articles? How many of them actually provide enough information to show that this guy is an actual notable footballer and not just something more than an amateur footballer. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 04:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: BTW, I am trying to find more about the calciomercado nomination. The source links to an article written by an Indian writer. I know this is wikipedia and we shouldn't be saying anything outlandish but honestly wouldn't surprise me if Bharti was included just because he was an Indian playing abroad and/or some agent work. There isn't even a description of why Bharti is included in the best U21 list, just his name. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 04:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per me in the last AfD. Fails
    explicitly not independent of the subject. The IB Times piece is highly derivative of it, and although that site may be reliable now, in 2014 it was largely a purveyor of high-volume clickbait.

    The mainstream media snippets e.g. this mentioned at the last AfD show him signing for Sintrense, and the article's infobox includes stats for that club. Soccerway has Sintrense data since 2013/14: in that time, no-one called Bharti, and no Indian player, has played for that club's first team. Nor can I find anything in the Portuguese media about his Sintrense career: one might have thought an Indian player enough of a novelty to have got a mention. Again, he may have been at Valladolid in some capacity, but his name doesn't appear on their youth team squad lists, which were archived regularly on the Wayback Machine. Start here and go backwards and forwards in date and up and down the age groups: he's not there.

    So, if all we've got are puff pieces and exaggerations on self-publishing sites and other online media readily accessible to an assiduous intermediary, I don't see that as a GNG pass. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 11:03, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

    ]

  • Delete - fails ]
  • Delete - fails GNG Spiderone 19:18, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The article was nominated for deletion earlier but the community decided that it would stay. The same user is always requesting to delete the page. The athlete is notable also in other countries. For example, most recently there was a contract offer from Club America in Mexico and it was widely written about in Mexican media also. [1] [2] [3]. They are all well known source. Some more examples: Also lastly, the comment made about how Indian media works based on agent contact, etc. How can you justify this answer with 100% facts? After doing research I managed to find an official document of Sintrense which you can have a look by clicking the document reference letter pdf at the bottom of this scouting page. [4] I don't think you could find more official and verifiable document than this. Regarding the stats, in Portugal only the Campeonanto Portugal is covered by Soccerway, Sintrense first team also plays in a regional Lisbon area League/Cup where Abneet played. The 13 games were taken from [5] Zerozero is official statistics for all leagues in Portugal,soccerway even uses them to update their stats for the third division in Portugal. The article can be modified, changed can be made and that's not a problem, this article has been nominated the second time by the exact same person. (first time it was agreed that it's good enough to be on wikipedia). I just hope this wikipedia community understands and this article is not deleted just because of personal problems of some individual who has been requesting deletion over and over again. Like I said, required changed can be made.

Aksportpro (talk) 09:43, 8 December 2018 (UTC)Aksportpro[reply]

Your two Mexican sources don't really count for anything other than routine transfer stuff. Don't know how that would contribute for GNG. Not sure about the official document. No one is denying him being with the Portuguese side, just that he played. The ZeroZero site says he was born in Poland. Also, the article wasn't kept last time because it was deemed notable enough. It was closed due to no common consensus. Literally, that is what the closing admin said. By the way, why do you only do stuff on wikipedia when it comes to Abneet Bharti? --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 20:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to

List of The X Factor finalists (UK series 13)#Four of Diamonds. Any material that might be merged to the redirect target is still available from the article history. Randykitty (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Four of Diamonds (band)

talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Meets neither

WP:MUSICBIO. 8th place finish on a reality show is hardly notable. Onel5969 TT me 18:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:11, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:39, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Robin des Champs

Robin des Champs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable, even if some of its progeny are. Nothing in article suggests meeting

WP:NHORSERACING. Article had no references at all until after animal died. Kevin McE (talk) 17:21, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:15, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:40, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ampika Pickston

Ampika Pickston (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable, GNG, insufficient references. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 17:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Giant oarfish. Randykitty (talk) 14:42, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Earthquake fish

Earthquake fish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seems to be an unnecessary page considering that 2/3 of the linked articles are redlinks. Kb03 (talk) 16:49, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The article, though in need of much improvement, could certainly be expanded to discuss the connection between fish and earthquakes in a more generalized sense. It is not a DAB page and therefore the redlinks are not a concern. Jmertel23 (talk) 21:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to
    WP:CIRCULAR citations to Chinese Wikipedia should be removed. (As an aside, while I don't think it's related, it is suspicious that a shitty article on a Taiwanese topic would show up right after WAM. I was not that active on WAM this year, but I do think the event needs to get its act together; they were reluctant, earlier, to implement stricter content rules as it might discourage content creation, but the number of entries seems to have gone down every year regardless, without a forced improvement in article quality.) Hijiri 88 (やや) 22:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. PriceDL (talk) 01:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. PriceDL (talk) 01:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge information is interesting, but this is not disambiguation material, as the species don't seem to have the common name mentioned, just share an association with earthquakes. But i think it could be added to the earthquake article, of if there is an article on earthquake mythology, as well as the species articles. All accepted species are inherently notable, so redlinks shouldn't be an issue here. --]
  • Merge to Giant oarfish as most immediately applicable target. #2 (Regalecus russelii) just has a conceptual association, #3 does not even have a source, and both are redlinks - that's very meagre grounds for a disambiguation. Mention of R. russelii can be made there if the earthquake association is explained in the article. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:53, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:23, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Global One Belt One Road Association

Global One Belt One Road Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Created by a likely undeclared paid editor, this organisation appears to fail

WP:NCORP as I am unable to find anything in English about it. The article is promotional and virtually unreferenced. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:08, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Majha Agadbam

Majha Agadbam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I thought about speedying as spam, but in any case there's no indication how this meets WP:Notability (films) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:02, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:02, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to List of Underdog characters#Simon Bar Sinister. Randykitty (talk) 14:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Bar Sinister

Simon Bar Sinister (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

"Biography" of a fictional character, written almost entirely in-universe with no

reliably sourced evidence of real-world context for standalone notability. The only references being cited here at all are linguistic sources for the etymology and meaning of "bar sinister" as a standard English phrase, not sources about the character as a character. List of Underdog characters already exists, and nothing here demonstrates or sources a reason why Simon Bar Sinister would warrant getting spun off as a separate article topic. Bearcat (talk) 20:35, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 14:48, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ]
Either one works for me! Capt. Milokan (talk) 21:28, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete.

]

Ted Eckersdorff

Ted Eckersdorff (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

References available give no indication of notability. Mccapra (talk) 23:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 14:43, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to New Warriors#Counter Force Team. Randykitty (talk) 14:48, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Counter Force (Marvel Comics)

Counter Force (Marvel Comics) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable team, only sourced to primary sources, fails

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:44, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:44, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sandstein 18:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

South African Judicial Education Journal

South African Judicial Education Journal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable new journal. No selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet

WP:TOOSOON". Article dePRODded by article creator without specific reason given, after adding two references (one a simple listing, the other a bio of the editor-in-chief. Journal only started this year and has published 1 (one) issue. PROD reason still stands, hence: delete. Randykitty (talk) 16:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 16:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 16:57, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Not sure how this works, but creator of page (me) requesting that article be kept. Reason being that journal intent is of critical importance to research and debate of the judicial environment, and especially the constitutional court which is the highest court in South Africa. I do, however, understand the request to delete based on article being too new. This journal is, however, not a magazine but a journal filling a very unique role within the context. I should have kept the article in draft format originally. Apologies for dePRODing without reason - still learning how to respond to AFD process. I will respect the choice to delete should consensus be reached Wynlib40 (talk) 17:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:52, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Benedykta Mackieło

Benedykta Mackieło (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a purported supercentenarian which tells us almost nothing about her. Almost no sources, and those which do exist are of laughably

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lithuania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:18, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:18, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:56, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Streels of Urtah

Streels of Urtah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Undue weight - fictitiuous location occuring sporadically (though admittedly rather signicant and fascinating) in two novels that are (sadly) not read very often (talk) 10:26, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded in all respects and with thanks. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 23:15, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PS. The article
Beklan Empire. The dab pages Streel and Quiso may also be affected.-- (talk) 13:21, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 11:29, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

José Coelho de Souza

José Coelho de Souza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Longevity claimant about whom almost nothing is known. Very little source material, and what exists tells us nothing beyond his profession and claimed age; the rest is filler

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:20, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:58, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sarhat Rashidova

Sarhat Rashidova (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Longevity claimant who got a brief spate of coverage, then died. There's essentially nothing about her life, and the little geography lesson on her home village demonstrates just how strained this is.

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Randykitty (talk) 15:00, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Courage the Cowardly Dog characters

List of Courage the Cowardly Dog characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an extensive list of characters that have no notability outside of the main series. Descriptions are written from the episode the characters appear in, and that's all. Notable voice actors could easily be inserted (if not already contained in) the main episode list or the main article. The references page falls to pieces without 1st-party (references to the series itself) citations. Paper Luigi TC 09:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:09, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:09, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 10:09, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If I may quote patsw from the previous AfD: "Keep The nomination is merely an incomplete assertion. The article is a pragmatic spin-off from another article where its independent coverage is manifest." The arguments from the first AfD appear to remain applicable here. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:55, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The article's references are very poor. If we remove all first-party citations (those referencing the series itself), we are left with an obituary for one of the voice actors, a list of voice actors, and a dead link to an article mentioning one of the voice actors. This series features numerous one-off antagonists and characters whose mentions in this WP article are baffling considering notability standards. There is nothing worth keeping in this article that could not be integrated into the main article or episode list. I cannot agree with the idea that this article's "independent coverage is manifested" when nearly all of its references are to the series itself. Paper Luigi TC 10:25, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    So you might have intended to make a merge proposal, not a deletion proposal. As a proposed deletion, though, it's an obvious (to me) Keep. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:00, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 11:24, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:07, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Sandstein 18:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Baptists (band)

Baptists (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a band, not properly sourced as being notable under any

reference bomb genre labels rather than any notability-making accomplishments, so nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the article from having to be much better referenced than this. Bearcat (talk) 23:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
NMUSIC #5 is not passed by albums on just any record label, it's passed only if the albums are on a specific narrow tier of major labels and/or noteworthy independent labels, and Southern Lord is not
blog entry, not to coverage which establishes its notability at all. Bearcat (talk) 14:41, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 11:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 15:02, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gene Haynes

Gene Haynes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a high school principal, who has no really strong claim to being more notable than most other high school principals. Nothing stated here is a genuinely strong claim of nationalized significance at all, and none of the sourcing expands beyond the purely local human interest coverage that any long-serving principal of any high school could probably show in their local media. Bearcat (talk) 22:17, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
State awards are usually not considered enough to show notability. I am a bit confused. How is the Omaha World Herald not the local paper for someone who's entire career was spent teaching in Omaha? Papaursa (talk) 03:28, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying to point out that there is coverage of Haynes in sources based outside of Omaha[29] and that coverage of him in the Omaha World Herald is significant and not "human interest"-only. Of course Omaha is local to most of his career. Since a the discussion is in part focusing on the question of "local" I want to point out that
WP:LOCALINT failed, I think, because it was too restrictive. But even if one tries to satisfy that essay, coverage of Haynes has, I think, "to a very high standard, have multiple reliable sources independent from the subject that provide in-depth, non-trivial coverage pertaining to the subject itself." Smmurphy(Talk) 09:20, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Please tell me what sources are not local for a man from Omaha--Omaha Magazine, Omaha World Herald, or Omaha licensed KETV? Papaursa (talk) 03:28, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:26, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I want to explain the reasoning behind my vote in more detail. There seems little doubt that Gene Haynes has been an asset to his community. However, every community has many people of whom that can be said, so that alone wouldn't seem to make him "encyclopedic". My comment on "local sources" was meant as a question/challenge to the editors who said the coverage was not local because he "got statewide and regional newspaper coverage" and "has been cited extensively in media sources beyond his local community." It may also be worth reminding people that
    WP:N says "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability". High school football coaches and principals are rarely considered WP notable, regardless of duration. Papaursa (talk) 20:36, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete Fails ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete Don't believe
    WP:BIO says a person should be "remarkable", "significant", or "unusual enough to deserve attention" and I don't see that he meets any of those. He appears to be well thought of and has been in his position for a long time, but neither of those meet any notability standards. Not seeing broad geographic coverage that would distinguish him from the "local heroes" that are honored in every town.Sandals1 (talk) 19:17, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 15:03, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brat Pack (Dutch band)

Brat Pack (Dutch band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly sourced article about a band, whose strongest notability claim is that their debut album placed in a

reliable source. The article states that they toured, but the notability test for touring is not the statement itself but the degree to which it can be referenced to evidence of media coverage about the tour, such as actual concert reviews in reliable sources. And apart from the USERG discussion forum, the only other reference present here at all is their last.fm profile, which is not a notability-making source for a band as every band automatically gets one of those as soon as one last.fm user has scrobbled one listen. Nothing here is notable enough to exempt them from having to have much better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 11:06, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Apparent

]

Pan African Air Services

Pan African Air Services (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced article plus

notability concerns. I found a single mention to an airline with this name in the Flight digital archive [38] that was from Tanzania.--Jetstreamer Talk 19:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:25, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:26, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep/withdrawn. Better sources than I found were available.

]

Innovative Solutions In Space

Innovative Solutions In Space (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

By my

WP:NEXIST I looked only beyond. gidonb (talk) 14:08, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett (talk) 14:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett (talk) 14:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett (talk) 14:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett (talk) 14:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy deleted per

]

Mira Filzah (Malaysian actress)

Mira Filzah (Malaysian actress) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is a recreation of the article of the same name which previously have been deleted due to promotional. Fandi89 (talk) 13:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:53, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 15:10, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Progress Wrestling events

List of Progress Wrestling events (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Despite the parent article being clearly notable, the list of events are simply non-notable events. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:21, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • A list of 10 non-notable events do not add up to one notable list IMO. Didn't say it was a policy, stating my opinion that if NO items on the list are notable, then the list isn't notable either. MPJ-DK (talk) 01:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Ctenochromis pectoralis. Randykitty (talk) 15:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ctenochromis aff. pectoralis

Ctenochromis aff. pectoralis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

there are no verifiable sources for this "taxon", the IUCN no longer have an entry for it Quetzal1964 (talk) 12:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 17:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was it considered a valid taxon though? It was an "undescribed species", my understanding is that without a formal description there is no valid taxon. This seems to have been a case of there's a fish that looks like C. pectoralis but, possibly because it was outside the known range of that taxon, may not be C. pectoralis. Quetzal1964 (talk) 09:24, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It was never considered a valid taxon. When taxonomists use "
    aff." it generally means "I don't think it's the same as (species name following aff.), but it is most similar to that species". The IUCN link in the taxonbar at the bottom of the page still works. This is one of dozens of articles for undescribed species created by PolBot based on IUCN listings (other can be found in Category:Undescribed species and subcategories). I don't see a reason to single this particular one out; they should be discussed collectively. I'm inclined to think they all should be deleted. Plantdrew (talk) 04:43, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Go ahead and put through an AfD for the others, then. Agricolae (talk) 20:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The current version of the IUCN page is found here: [42]. Buried in the collapses, it says, "The status of the population in Mzima springs is uncertain. It might be distinct from Ctenochromis pectoralis known from the Pangani drainage. More research is required." They add, "Thought to be restricted to a single location at Mzima Springs in Tsavo National Park (Seegers et al. unpubl.)." So, this is clearly the fish Okeyo thought was C. pectoralis.
Margaret Kalacska, "Land Cover, Land Use, and Climate Change Impacts on Endemic Cichlid Habitats in Northern Tanzania", Remote Sensing, 9:623 doi:10.3390/rs9060623 [43], similarly reports that there is present at the Chemka springs, Tanzania (on the southern flank of Mt. Kilimanjaro - the Mzima springs, Kenya, are on the northeast flank), a "Ctenochromis sp. (undescribed). Potential area of occupancy <1 km2. Closely related to C. pectoralis (Pfeffer, 1893), described from the Pangani River further downstream." (and I find two hobbyist journals from 2011 and 2015 reporting live captures). I think the best way to deal with this is to discuss these two populations of perhaps-Ctenochromis pectoralis on the C. pectoralis page as part of an explanation of the broader issue of its claimed extinction. Agricolae (talk) 01:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 15:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Nora of Oettingen-Spielberg

Princess Nora of Oettingen-Spielberg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-encyclopedic article on a person from a noble family with no significant accomplishments. WP is not a social calendar. The title is only a courtesy title for what was once a ruling house 2 centuries ago, not an official one. DGG ( talk ) 06:11, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Comment - Being the member of a royal house does not make one notable, of course, but doesn't being the subject of articles in ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why delete it and then rewrite it, instead of rewriting now? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:20, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The WSJ is not about her wedding. Not to mention the Social Register wouldn't include Europeans. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 16:39, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. The obvious problems of this article and how to correct these can be discussed on the article talk page. Randykitty (talk) 15:27, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of the largest evangelical churches

List of the largest evangelical churches (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm being bold here, but per

WP:TNT
, owing to the number of errors and lack of consistent methodology for this list article, I think it should be deleted till we clearly define what we want it to represent. Wikipedia is widely used, and its better a topic isn't covered at all, than for it to be propagating false information.

The ERRORS

Let me start with the three Nigerian churches listed, RCCG, LFCW and Deeper Life definitely have more than a million weekly attendance every Sunday morning. These churches are present in every Nigerian state, and in most African nations. The 50k listed for LFCW is the intended capacity for their international headquarters, Faith Tabernacle same as the 65k for Deeper Life 1. For RCCG, there is no real central national headquarters, except the monthly convention, which is where they got the 500k from. This has always been held once in a month, not weekly. For Yoido, the weekly attendance is about 200k, not 800k. Even the affiliation column for most is not accurate. I have sources for everything I have stated above, it just seem easier to type without links.

WHAT I THINK THE ARTICLE SHOULD BE

This article should contain list of largest church buildings based on human capacity. We already have list articles based on area, height and width as seen

List of tallest churches and List of longest church buildings. We have none for human capacity, which is key considering that even Guinness World Record recognizes this metric in its release 1 2 3. For an estimate on the number of entire members of churches we have List of the largest Protestant denominations
.

cc ජපස HandsomeBoy (talk) 01:47, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is the problem, I don't know the direction to cleanup. Is it meant to contain largest evangelical churches in a single church building based on weekly attendance? HandsomeBoy (talk) 02:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
From my reading, I doubt that it is intended to imply single buildings, but I could be wrong about this. jps (talk) 02:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply jps. If that is the case, then there is a problem. I'm 100% certain that the three Nigerian churches listed have more than one million members attending services on Sunday morning, but you can't get a factual estimate of the actual number. Recently, the founder of one of the church listed stated that they have 6 million members, which is definitely closer to the truth than the 50k listed in the article. If it is for the entire church, then I'll rather remove the three Nigerian churches listed there than continue to propagate incorrect information. HandsomeBoy (talk) 02:20, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand the desire not to misinform, but that's sorta the problem with lists like this. We have to do the best we can with the sources we have. It's important, however, to distinguish churches with congregations. Single congregations can scale greatly now with technology and some "megachurches" will have satellite campuses which arguably count as single congregations. This means that congregations are not necessarily confined to single buildings. On the other hand, we aren't talking about "churches" or "denominations" in the sense of "communions" which may have separate congregations led by different people, for example. jps (talk) 02:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree and understand your point about issues with lists such as this. But its scope and titular objective should be clear, and we can have a sensible estimate. Your point about congregation is also apt. I've been a part of all three listed churches via their satellite viewing centers, and it is still normally used. That is why I think congregation might not be so measurable from available sources. But the sitting capacity of churches is factual verifiable public knowledge that deserve a list article. At the time of completion, Faith Tabernacle was listed by Guinness World Record as the largest church auditorium in the world. Last Sunday, a 100k capacity church auditorium was opened in Abuja, and has been regarded by Nigerian media as the largest in the world. This was what draw my interest to these articles, I came to Wikipedia to find other similarly large church auditoriums in the world (sitting capacity), only to discover ambiguity. I understand the differences between churches and denominations, these megachurches listed are also denominations. Infact, they are the only church under their denomination, but have multiple branches which is only disambiguated with its location i.e ChurchName, LocationOfBranch. I've an Anglican background, so I also understand how a Diocese can have multiple archdeaconary, parishes, etc. HandsomeBoy (talk) 03:32, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think we're on the same page. Although in principle it's easy to know building capacity (and that is more easily verified than claims as to worship service attendance), in practice, this amount is often not well documented either. Can we agree in principle that it would be a good idea to separate the idea of a church building, a congregation, and a church/denomination? It's possible that these ideas could overlap and that should be okay too. jps (talk) 10:11, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Skirts89: It will be very helpful if you can add what you think this article should contain to your keep rationale. Just saying it should be kept because AFD it not cleanup does little good order than promoting inconsistencies which has led to falsehood in the article.HandsomeBoy (talk) 23:48, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article should be kept, even as is. If you would like to edit it to improve it further, that is always welcomed! Skirts89 (talk) 20:49, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 15:29, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of number-one Billboard Hot Single Sales number-one singles of the 1980s

List of number-one Billboard Hot Single Sales number-one singles of the 1980s (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't believe a list of number ones for every secondary chart in Billboard is needed, especially a component chart like this one that served as a means to compile the Hot 100. Also, as there is no article about the chart itself, there is really no encyclopedic significance to what reached number one on it. For example, even with a song like Candle in the Wind 1997, the discussion would be about how it reached number one on the Hot 100 primarily due to sales, not about being number one on this chart. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:18, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Really conflicted on this one, so much work went into it I'd like to keep it. What's needed is a source to substantiate notability - but none is provided on the page, just Billboard's back-issues (which are not a list of 1980's no.1 singles). Searching myself I could not find one. As such
    WP:GNG failed. @70Jack90: - I'd really like to save your article, can you suggest something? FOARP (talk) 20:07, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:35, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Coan

Lee Coan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ineligible for PROD - was deleted at AfD in 2008 but apparently subsequently recreated, unnoticed.

Anyway, same rationale applies as last AfD, only moreso. Doesn't appear to meet

WP:NAUTHOR. No sources located about him, only articles by him, which doesn't cut it. ♠PMC(talk) 07:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:48, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:48, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:35, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sofitel St. Petersburg

Sofitel St. Petersburg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't think of an argument why this building should be notable.  --Lambiam 07:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:50, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:22, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alden Caldwell

Alden Caldwell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable passenger of the Titanic; minimal RS coverage outside of this single event. Clear case of

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:00, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete and redirect to

]

Ruth Becker

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

Non-notable passenger of the Titanic; minimal RS coverage outside of this single event. Clear case of

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 15:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Activism 2.0

Activism 2.0 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Neologism appeared in 2011 mostly by the work of one editor, and since then most of the citations establishing its existence seem to have been removed automatically as they were blacklisted for being self promotion. Further little work has been done to expand it since its inception ,and a quick google search for "activism 2.0" shows it being used as buzzwords in disparate contexts, with not unified concrete established usage. The remaining citations appear to be a small number of

WP:UGC, which establish the definition of "slacktivism" and not the namesake of the article itself. Ethanpet113 (talk) 06:25, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete and redirect to

]

Sid Daniels

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

Non-notable crew member of the Titanic; minimal RS coverage outside of this single event. Clear case of

]

There is no policy or guideline that the last surviving member of a famous ships crew is notable or entitled to an article. He does not inherit the notability of this disaster because he lived a long time after being on the ship, per ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Zac Efron. Anything worth merging is still available from the article history. Randykitty (talk) 15:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zac Efron discography

Zac Efron discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

In case he must have an article for his discography, Zac is a singer ?, what an absurd thing. — 

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to
    High School Musical discography, where it looks like a vast majority of the article was copied from. It doesn’t make sense for him to have his own discography when his work is as of a part of ensemble in soundtrack albums rather than as a solo artist. Sergecross73 msg me 11:31, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep This article has only just been made recently and it wouldn't have been approved if it wasn't appropriate. Whilst Efron is mainly an actor, he is a singer as well and has a discography. A redirect to the High School Musical cast discography would be inappropriate as Efron has sang ouside of High School Musical. In short Efron has a discography which should either exist on it's own page or as a section on Efron's main page. Mn1548 (talk) 18:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is incorrect logic. An AFC-passes article is not immune to being deleted or redirected - it is passed or failed generally by a single editor who is holding it to the lowest of standards. The community can definitely over-ride that. Additionally, redirects are not required to encompass every aspect of a subject. But if that’s really a concern, as mentioned above, it could also just be redirected to Zac Efron, and his article could host the discography, or have a link to the HSM discography. Sergecross73 msg me 18:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.
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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Randykitty (talk) 15:42, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Habib Miyan

Habib Miyan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsubstantiated longevity claimant with almost nothing to say about him. The very few sources here are standard fare for such implausible claims.

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 08:06, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.google.pl/search?q=abneet+bharti+mexico&oq=abneet+bharti+mexico+&aqs=chrome..69i57.2771j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
  2. ^ http://www.record.com.mx/futbol-futbol-nacional-liga-mx-america/america-estaria-tras-el-unico-futbolista-hindu-que-milita-en
  3. ^ https://www.univision.com/deportes/futbol/liga-mx/america-sigue-a-jugador-de-la-seleccion-de-india
  4. ^ http://www.dalessandroscouting.com/abneet-bharti.html
  5. ^ https://www.zerozero.pt/jogador.php?id=570323&search=1&search_string=abneet+bharti&searchdb=1
  6. ^ "Longest retirement pension". guinnessworldrecords.com. Retrieved 4 December 2018.
  7. ^ "Indian man's 65 years as OAP". BBC News. 22 May 2003 – via news.bbc.co.uk.
  8. ^ "Mecca looms for aged pilgrim". BBC News. 24 December 2003 – via news.bbc.co.uk.
  9. ^ "Mecca dream for aged pilgrim". BBC News. 10 February 2004 – via news.bbc.co.uk.
  10. ^ "'Oldest man' passes away in India". BBC News. 19 August 2008 – via news.bbc.co.uk.
  11. ^ a b "In pictures: Ancient Indian's Mecca dream". BBC News. 7 October 2003 – via news.bbc.co.uk.
  12. Times of India
    .
  13. Times of India
    .
  14. ^ "137, but Habib Miyan is not old". hindustantimes.com. 1 October 2006.
  15. ^ "World's 'oldest man' dies in India". Telegraph uk. 20 August 2008 – via www.telegraph.co.uk.
  16. ^ "Life lessons from 138-year-old Habib Miyan". www.rediff.com.
  17. ^ "World's 'oldest man' dies in India". abc.net.au. 20 August 2008.
  18. ^ "Man who has seen three centuries". www.telegraphindia.com.
  19. ^ "India's oldest man Habib Miyan suffers hip fracture". dnaindia. 14 September 2006.
  20. ^ "Habib Mian, possibly country's oldest man, dies". India Today.
  21. ^ "Jaipur pays Tribute to India's Grand Old Man Habib Miyan : Gulf News 2008". www.pressreader.com.
  22. ^ "The Hindu : Portrait of a 125-year-old". www.thehindu.com.
  23. ^ "Jaipur's Habib Miyan at 137: celebrating yet another birthday". The Hindu. 21 May 2006. Retrieved 4 December 2018.
I have listed several independent reliable sources covering the subject in great detail. How is coverage in The Telegraph [47], Gulf News [48], BBC [49][50], The Hindu [51], being considered as trivial coverage ?--DBigXray 08:35, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
]
No, we are here to write a trustworthy reference work. Shit like this sabotages that goal; presenting clear falsehoods as though they're fact. There may be a neutrally written, verifiable article to be written about this guy but no part of the current mess would find its way in there. Hence my appeal to ]
Thanks for the kind reply Reyk, I get your opinion, but I will point to
WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. The article as it stands now has inline citations for everything it states, you are welcome to start a discussion thread on the talk page for further improvements if you believe there is room for more improvement. --DBigXray 15:46, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
What is wrong with the coverage that has been presented ?
WP:GNG criteria of multiple reliable sources have been met. --DBigXray 09:35, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ). No further edits should be made to this page.