Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 August 27

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
< 26 August 28 August >

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. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger Conference

Tiger Conference (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 claim to any notability. Fails

WP:N. Deleted in Russian Wikipedia. Mitte27 (talk) 23:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Mitte27 (talk) 23:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a promotional article that seems to be native advertising created by a now blocked sockpuppet of a suspected undisclosed paid editor. There is a lack of non-promotional coverage in reliable sources so
    WP:GNG is not passed in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Appears promo. Doesn't pass
    WP:BEFORE   // Timothy :: talk  23:59, 29 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Consensus is keep, perhaps a merge is possible, but that can be discussed outside AfD. Tone 08:17, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Media coverage of Bernie Sanders

AfDs for this article:
Media coverage of Bernie Sanders (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)

Wikipedia politics spans thousands of years. Not only was Bernie never nominated, there doesn't seem to be many unusual controversies, aside from a couple coverage disputes. Compared to human history as a whole, his campaign just wasn't that controversial. Many voters simply disagreed with his ideas. Atdevel (talk) 23:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, or Merge with
    talk 23:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP A rather large number people participated earlier this year in an AFD for this. Nothing has changed. Reliable sources give significant coverage to this, so it passes the general notability guidelines, just as it did the previous times it went to AFD. Dream Focus 02:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reliable sources give significant coverage to this. A two-part rebuttal:
(1) Many many things gets significant coverage in a presidential election. If a campaign screams "the media is biased", it will often get reported by someone. Every election also has meta pieces about "media coverage" and "media bias" mentioning many candidates. For example, the best sources in this article are academic books and reports which cover media coverage in general and mention many presidential candidates.
(2) There is not significant coverage about this subject beyond what could easily be covered in one paragraph in the
talk) 02:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Delete per
    WP:POVFORK asserting that the media is biased against Sanders. While the title was changed from "Media bias against Bernie Sanders", the content has not reflected this change. It is still a list of assertions from pundits alleging bias against Sanders with limited rebuttal and remarkably little verifiable fact. Some of this content could be merged into his page and pages for his presidential campaigns, but the article as it stands is far from encyclopedic, and my attempts to make constructive edits have been repeatedly rebuffed to the point where I have stopped editing the page. --WMSR (talk) 02:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete I firmly reject the premise of the nomination. This is a notable subject. That said, in the previous AfD, I advocated for the removal of this version of the article because it was politically hijacked by
    WP:AGENDA people to turn it into the dismissive article it currently is. If you read the article, only one side is being presented. It is so non-sensical to repeatedly say "there is nothing to see here folks" when the details and depth of the allegations they are defending against are not presented. You "doth protest too much, methinks" We should have a proper article about the Bernie Blackout. I always advocate for retention of valid content, however I do not like wikipedia hosting incorrect information. This version of the article removed a large amount of content that previously told the story. It is now incomplete, distorted and thus incorrect information. Trackinfo (talk) 05:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete or merge with
    GNG, but that doesn't mean we should have an article on them. Taking a longer view I don't think Bernie Sanders is going to be nearly significant enough to justify this kind of treatment. While he's an influential figure now, he's also a US Senator known for unsuccessfully seeking the Democratic presidential nomination twice, and I don't think he will be widely remembered, say, fifty years from now. Imagine how people would feel about an article on, say, Media coverage of George McGovern. I also think it's significant that this article consists almost entirely of statements some person or group has made about media coverage of Bernie Sanders, referenced to the place where those statements were made. The coverage apparently doesn't allow building a narrative, as opposed to a series of isolated quotes. Hut 8.5 07:04, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Merge any truly revelant portions to the article on Senator Sanders. There is no reason for this content fork.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep If only because I see little reason to delete and it is still kind of topical, maybe after the election if things quiet down, could do a merge.Selfstudier (talk) 12:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
^
talk 13:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
Nominator appears a single purpose account, one shouldn't follow recommendations from them or supporters of such accounts.Selfstudier (talk) 16:55, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There are sufficient sources to establish notability. I found for example on the first page of a google search for media coverage bernie sanders:
"The media keep falling in love — with anybody but Bernie Sanders" (
Washington Post
)
"What Bernie Sanders Gets Right About the Media" (
New York Times
]])
"Coverage of Bernie Sanders suffers from a lack of imagination" (Columbia Journalism Review)
"Bernie Sanders versus the “corporate media,” explained" (Vox Media)
"Why Does Mainstream Media Keep Attacking Bernie Sanders as He Wins?" {GQ)
Also a podcast with FiveThirtyEight and articles in In These Times, the Pointer Report and Jacobin (magazine)

TFD (talk) 17:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first source is composed from opinion quotes. All the others are about Bernie's view of the media, not about media coverage of him. Atdevel (talk) 20:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, the articles outline how Sanders has been covered in the media and include comments about the coverage by Sanders supporters, journalists and media observers. There is general agreement on the facts presented, and differing opinions on the reasons. TFD (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Had it just been a talking point during the 2020 campaign, it would have been one thing, but it was the same during the 2016 campaign too. There are ample sources discussing the Bernie Blackout phenomena ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5]) and even a full-length documentary ([6]). The topic is unquestionably notable. ImTheIP (talk) 21:25, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An article for the documentary would make sense, but this would be very different from the current article. Relative historical significance should be taken into account in assessing importance, and Bernie didn't even get the nomination once, which simply increases the chance for being president. Atdevel (talk) 23:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I just looked up the Bernie Blackout documentary, it's actually more about his campaign in general than media coverage https://www.al.com/life/2020/05/alabama-filmmaker-how-we-made-our-bernie-sanders-doc.html Atdevel (talk) 01:19, 30 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom Center (mental health organization)

Freedom Center (mental health organization) (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)

advertising for a charity--purely promotional style more suited for its web page. DGG ( talk ) 21:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:12, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:12, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:12, 27 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Sarah Zucker. Eddie891 Talk Work 23:59, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Current Sea

The Current Sea (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 advertising for non-notable advertising consultancy. Apparent coi. DGG ( talk ) 21:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-notable spam. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Sarah Zucker. Zucker is an artist who makes lots of animated gifs. The "consultancy" is a joke. She's not advertising anything. If the creator has a CoI, they're astonishingly uninformed about the subject. The more likely explanation is that they attended an edit-a-thon in 2016 and tried to make an article about something they were interested in, but have not stuck around long enough to learn how to do it properly. Vexations (talk) 22:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Vexations (talk) 22:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I had not noticed the individual also had an article. A merge is fine with me. DGG ( talk ) 01:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Sarah Zucker, it's already mentioned there and there is nothing of substance to merge. I'm not really sure if Zucker is notable either but she appears to be more notable than her company, so this seems fine for now. Spicy (talk) 02:23, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Sarah Zucker per Spicy. The company doesn't seem to be notable on its own. Worldlywise (talk) 02:45, 3 September 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:45, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

José Antonio Zapata Cabral

José Antonio Zapata Cabral (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 journalist and filmmaker with unverifiable grand claims. Reads like a CV. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 20:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A decent career in local journalism but nothing to really indicate notability. Mccapra (talk) 01:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. It was likely created by the subject (user "Uncabral") more than a decade ago. His radio show was deleted in 2017 (
    t • c) 06:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete Does not meet
    WP:People. Does not have any references. Google news only returns one result.Expertwikiguy (talk) 08:27, 3 September 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ted Newsom

Ted Newsom (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)

Lacks notability. Can’t find a lot of reliable sources to corroborate much of the information within the article, source supporting his death is relatively weak. Doesn’t look like much of his filmography is notable either. Rusted AutoParts 20:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per nom. Plus I see that some of the claims made in the article were taken from his personal IMDB page, which is not a reliable source. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 21:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete signs of lots of self-editing with no indication of passing
    WP:ANYBIO. Graywalls (talk) 01:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep Meets
    WP:AUTHOR which states "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work." Some of the movies such as Ed Wood are pretty well known. Altough, this article lacks proper references and needs lot's of work. Expertwikiguy (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:35, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
@Expertwikiguy: If you're referring to the Tim Burton movie, that isn't the Ed Wood movie he was involved in. Rusted AutoParts 06:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete For somebody recently-deceased, you'd expect to be able to find obituaries to source and improve the article, but I can't find anything of the sort. If we can't fix up the article, we shouldn't have it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:16, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Nothing that passes GNG, BASIC or WP:AUTHOR. He co-wrote The Unofficial NFL Players Handbook, it's humor, but I still thought it would pass something in
    WP:NSPORT, but I couldn't find anything.   // Timothy :: talk  07:11, 6 September 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete and redirect to Chhota Bheem#Television films. There is consensus to not keep the article. Redirects are cheap so... delete and redirect. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 09:48, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chhota Bheem: Dholakpur ke Khiladi

Chhota Bheem: Dholakpur ke Khiladi (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 film with nothing found in a

WP:BEFORE to establish notability. Tagged for over a year. Donaldd23 (talk) 20:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 20:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 20:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 20:37, 27 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:46, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chhota Bheem In Junglee Kabila

AfDs for this article:
Chhota Bheem In Junglee Kabila (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 film with nothing found in a

WP:BEFORE to establish notability. Tagged for over a year. Donaldd23 (talk) 20:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 20:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 20:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 20:36, 27 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete. This is a blatant hoax. Fences&Windows 12:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mittir Masi

Mittir Masi (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)

Nominator's statement: Non notable activist/detective, fails

WP:GNG. All of references are misleading/unrelated. No mention of the person nowhere in references. I did google search with "Mittir Masi" & "মিত্তির মাসি" but unable to find one single source (while searching, please don't confuse with Mitin Masi (মিতিন মাসি)). আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 20:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mittir Masi is a planned baseless article to troll a non-notable female of Facebook. This article has almost cloned the name of a genuine article Mitin Masi. First, three citations nothing related to either this article or article Mitin Masi. Citation 4th, 5th and 6th are for article Mitin Masi and 7th citation are not related for both the articles. So there is not a single citation for this article. This article is created by a new user. I came to know abt this article after receiving complaints from a journalist who read Wikipedia. It's a serious issue after my complain Bengali Wikipedia deleted this article. Hope you too will take genuine action to the editor and for the article. Some site publishes Wikipedia articles like this and they hv started defaming that person providing the reference of Wikipedia. This is a serious planned offence to the woman. How come without a single verified citation for this person this article remain for more than a week? Pls take action to those editors and block those ip if IP address is used, I am afraid if media take this issue moral of an editor like us will be down. ---Sumita Roy Dutta (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The content has descriptions and language more suitable for a comic book character and not an actual person. This is in line with the above remarks by bnwiki editors (which I'm not) suspecting a bogus biography and possibly not in good faith. Note that the only other page on this subject was deleted from the Bengali WP. The statements in the Wikidata item provide only the English WP page as references. -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:50, 29 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Volcana (DC Comics)

Volcana (DC 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)

The article fails to establish independent notability. TTN (talk) 20:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 20:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 20:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do we really need to go through this again?
WP:GNG refers to the existence of sources, not the citations in the article. Darkknight2149 10:03, 28 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shourya Deep

Shourya Deep (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)

Subject doesn't seem to meet

WP:GNG. Adam9007 (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:59, 27 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Tone 18:37, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shayan Italia

AfDs for this article:
Shayan Italia (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)

At this point, I feel like a detective. What a con job this article has been for more than a decade now! Please bear with me as I enumerate all the evidence gathered and the problems with this fluff-fest. Why 3rd nomination, you ask? Well, in the

WP:MUSICBIO
!

Then there's the fact that the article has only ever been edited by the subject, sockpuppets, and Single Purpose Accounts, and most recently User:Musiceditor123, another SPA ( and as it appears a self-confessed associate to boot!), who has been at it since 2010 and has only added promotional junk like this, this and this about startups/philanthropy/awards; uploaded the subject's images or created articles about his song/album (now deleted).

Every single link I can find on Shayan Italia is promotional and PR-fed (yes, including that

WP:ONEEVENT. There have been no albums released since the article was created, no major songs, no music of any note for someone whose alleged notability is of a singer. The ones cited in first nom were self-published by the company FM Publishing (now shut), whose directors are Italia (yes, he) and family. See liquidation report
. The subject fails every criterion under WP:MUSICBIO.

I'm taking the liberty of notifying all who were involved in the previous noms (barring sockpuppets) to re-examine the new evidence and sources (if they are keen, that is):

L0b0t, EdJohnston, Michig, Drmies, Abecedare, Bongomatic, Serial Number 54129, SoWhy
. Have done so because this is a serious and a very long (unadressed?) case of possible Paid Editing and heavy COI, and such an article makes a travesty of Wikipedia!

Concluding request: If anyone is voting Keep, could you please not just say "many articles exist about him" and, instead, provide exact links to stories you found to be independent, in-depth, non-PR. Also, if anyone thinks I've misstepped anywhere, I'd be glad to be corrected. Thanks! Best regards, MaysinFourty (talk) 18:30, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. MaysinFourty (talk) 18:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. MaysinFourty (talk) 18:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MaysinFourty (talk) 18:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. MaysinFourty (talk) 18:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. MaysinFourty (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those people that were pinged--I'm in good company, but User:EdJohnston was there as well (and Bongo...I miss you). I voted "delete" a long time ago, and I had reasons for it--lack of sourcing, or lack of proper sourcing to generate notability. I see no reason to change my mind, but my old friend Hekerui probably sees no reason to change theirs. That Musiceditor might well be a sock, but it's kind of a useless question given how old the other account is; for our purposes, though, this edit alone was enough to block them as a "SPAM ONLY" account, and that's what I placed. Drmies (talk) 20:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I have revisited my 'delete' vote in the original 2009 AfD and have the same opinion now. It seems there was a rumor that he had released 'Deliverance' on Universal, a major label. Further study gives no evidence that Universal made such a release. A check for 'Shayan Italia' on discogs.com suggests he has one album, 'Deliverance', released by FM Publishing Limited in 2006 and a few singles and EPs. That firm only ever released records by him, and was liquidated in 2015, as pointed out above by the nominator. Two of the stockholders were surnamed 'Italia'. So we would probably conclude that his records were self-published. EdJohnston (talk) 13:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment FWIW re: the Universal label. Many self-promoting music acts claim an impressive sounding affiliation with Universal for simply being a customer of their distribution services. It's not the same as being signed and paid by a major label to be part of their galaxy of recording artists; it's just the opposite--a service available from a major Music conglomerate to any music label that is willing to let Universal distribute their product for a percent of sales, and dutifully entered in their database as "available" from Universal (which duped an earlier AfD editor into thinking this artist was releasing on a major label.) The reason why you can't find Shayan Italia among lists of Universal recording artists is because the actual label is FM Publishing, which is his own company. It is not a major label. ShelbyMarion (talk) 15:22, 28 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The responses suggest that the subject still doesn't satisfy GNG despite there being a lot of interviews and some other coverage. Wouldn't be against recreation if notability could be established. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Farid Yazdani

AfDs for this article:
Farid Yazdani (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 at least three problems with this

autobiography, the submission of which is discouraged. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]



    • Comment I would like to again point out there are many articles and interviews of Farid Yazdani online [3] - which I think validates his credibility. I think it's a weak delete request indeed and it should stay. As soon as Feudal is released, a wikipedia page will once again be made and I have a feeling it will stay. I'm just creating the page on his behalf to get ahead of the media push. I don't think the points are valid enough as he is a supporting lead on a new CBC TV series - which in alone should be enough credibility as it addresses the claim that he hasn't played in a "major role". [4]
Speaking about himself in Q&A interviews doesn't demonstrate notability — we require sources in which other people are writing or speaking about him in the third person. And even if you're going for "notable because he's had acting roles", that test isn't passed just because roles are listed — it's passed only when one or more of his roles have made him the subject of enough
WP:GNG, and no number of roles exempts a person from having to have coverage. Bearcat (talk) 19:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
    • Comment Do video interviews count toward press? I feel like they should be worth just as much if not more than print. For print, the page has already sourced an article that is strictly about him and his work [5]. I can also source at least 3 interviews on CP24 which is one of Toronto's largest, if not largest news outlet.

[6] [7] [8]

No, interviews don't count in any format, because they represent the subject talking about himself in the first person — but to count toward getting him over GNG, a source has to represent other people talking or writing about his importance and impact in the third person. You're allowed to sparingly use interviews for additional verification of facts after he's already been shown to clear GNG on proper journalism — for instance, if it happens to be in an interview that a person confirms their exact birthdate or their ethnic background, or comes out as LGBTQ or whatever, then you can use the interview to source that fact — but the interviews are not GNG-making coverage in and of themselves, if the article doesn't contain a sufficient number of third party sources written in the third person. Notability is not a thing people get to give themselves by talking about themselves self-promotionally — it's a thing other people have to anoint them with by externally and objectively assessing and analyzing the significance of their work, such as by writing content about it in newspapers and magazines and books. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • CommentFarid also won a Canadian Comedy award for Day Players [9], to add to the request for notable awards. He is seen talking about it in 2 of the interviews. I've answered every single request that has been made regarding what needs to be seen. The proof is sourced and reliable. Ive seen weaker wiki pages about other actors with less sourcing. Seems like a prejudice at this point and a weak delete request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.10.244.114 (talk) 14:40, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Every award that exists is not always an automatic notability clincher — awards support notability only to the extent that said award gets media coverage. If you want to make a person notable for winning an award, you cannot source that award win to the award's own self-published website about itself; it has to be sourced to journalistic reportage about the award ceremony in order to establish that the award is a notable one in the first place. Notability is not simply a matter of counting the number of footnotes an article has in it — there are a lot of websites out there that are not reliable or notability-supporting sources, so notability is about evaluating the quality of the sources rather than just their number. It is entirely possible for a person with more footnotes to be less notable than a person with fewer footnotes, because the quality of the sources is much more important than how many footnotes there are or aren't. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 1 September 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to List of military installations in Massachusetts. Tone 18:38, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

South Hingham Camp

South Hingham Camp (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 evidence of notability. The sole source is self-published with minimal details. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Sources don't support notability, just routine coverage. The Boston Globe reported they planted a victory garden on March 27, 1943, Lt. Thackery was in charge of bayonet drills after Lt. Hume was finished with PT (August 23, 1944, North Adams Transcript), but apparently someone was not happy with how it was going with Col. Patrick J. O'Brian's training methods because he was in trouble for it on Aug 8, 1944, (The Berkshire Eagle). Since the article says it only existed until November 1943, I'd say the article sources are not the best.   // Timothy :: talk  17:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with List of military installations in Massachusetts: I don't see indication that the fort is notable by itself, but there are some links to it from other places and it would be worth having a mention with some context. Realistically, a lot of the Massachusetts 'camp' stubs can be merged there as well. Eddie891 Talk Work 17:06, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with List of military installations in Massachusetts per Eddie891. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 17:52, 3 September 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Tone 18:37, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chief customer officer

Chief customer officer (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 cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources of this job role. There is a Wired article but it is tagged Partner Content so I think may be paid. There is a Forbes post but it is at forbes.com/sites/, which is mentioned as potentially not reliable at

WP:RSVETTING. Tacyarg (talk) 17:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Tacyarg (talk) 17:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:57, 28 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Tone 17:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ERequirements

ERequirements (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 significant coverage per

WP:N. The official website doesn't exist. SL93 (talk) 17:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I can't find any sources for notability. It's mentioned in a few spots, but its barely a mention. There domain is for sale, not a good sign. I'd say merge into UML but there are no sources.   // Timothy :: talk  17:14, 30 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Tone 17:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Mountain (2012 film)

The Mountain (2012 film) (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 film with no independent reviews found during a

WP:BEFORE search. Tagged for notability for almost 8 years. Donaldd23 (talk) 17:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 17:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 17:18, 27 August 2020 (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
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Tone 08:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July Fourth Toilet

AfDs for this article:
    July Fourth Toilet (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 musical band. Reads like a promotional piece. References do not confirm notability/are not reliable sources. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 17:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the
    list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Comment the first two sources are both interviews, which are specifically precluded under
    WP:NBAND - except for ... publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves. This just leave the nine-line review in the monthly(?) round-up of Scram magazine, which I'm not convinced is enough to demonstrate SigCov. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 07:45, 30 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 17:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Lost Choices

    The Lost Choices (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 of non notable film written by the director. RZuo (talk) 17:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. RZuo (talk) 17:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. RZuo (talk) 17:15, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep.

    (non-admin closure) ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Adopt Me!

    Adopt Me! (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)

    Per Roblox talk page. MaxandRubyPeppaBlueyCuriousGeorgeFan2.0 (talk) 17:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, because those games don't have the same coverage. You are comparing apples to oranges here. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That's like saying "This person is innocent of a crime, but should go to prison, because there are so many wrongfully convicted in prison." ❤︎PrincessPandaWiki (talk | contribs) 19:33, 28 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was no consensus. It's clear that a straight-up delete isn't happening, and that's really all AFD needs to decide. If people want to do a merge/redirect, that conversation can continue on the talk pages. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:06, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Arduino IDE

    Arduino IDE (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 claim of notability. Sources are self-published with no in-depth coverage. Nreatian (talk) 16:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep - Clearly the nominator has no idea about Arduino and its IDE. -
      Coriannakox (talk) 18:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC) (Creator of the article)[reply
      ]

    *Keep - Somone did not bother to do a book search

    before nominating this. ~Kvng (talk) 21:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    I'm OK with Arduino (software). That's what the IDE has always been called by the "official" developers. You are correct that the IDE runs on a separate host; it produces RISC processor code that runs on tiny processors, which is not in itself anything specific to "Arduino" (except for the bootloader, I guess.)
    talk) 21:44, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I'll accept that. But unless someone indicates they plan to expand the current article and resolve the content fork it would be better closed as a redirect or perhaps even a soft delete.Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:57, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: If there is a consensus on a merge/rename I'd support that; I'm simply against a delete or redirect w/o merge.   // Timothy :: talk  08:25, 6 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was Draft-ify. Moved to draft by the article's creator.

    π, ν) 00:40, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    GRIDI

    GRIDI (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)

    Promotional article and unreliable sources, mostly press releases. Even the claim "to be the world's largest MIDI sequencer by some musical technologists" is a circular reference from the company's own press release. No claim of notability. Nreatian (talk) 16:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - Per nominator's rationale. I am convinced that this topic is not notable enough for Wikipedia. I will move it to draftspace. -
      Coriannakox (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 18:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Robert Dayton

    Robert Dayton (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)

    Blatant promotional article. No references to attest for notability. First two references are actually links to an online shop selling his art. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 16:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment: Upon further inspection I've noticed that the creator of this article also uploaded the subject's
    WP:COI and possibly undisclosed paid editing. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 17:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the
    list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Comment: I am the author of this page. This is the first page I've ever created, and is definitely not paid editing! I'm currently in the process of editing text for neutrality and also to add additional citations. This person is an important figure in the Canadian underground scene and deserves a wikipage. --PoussinChevre (talk) 17:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you explain your connection to the subject given that you have stated here that you took a photograph of him in what appears to be a private residence? Nearlyevil665 (talk) 17:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @
    talk) 17:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Comment: I know the subject because we're from the same town - I felt he was a worthwhile subject for my first wiki page. However, I see now that I published too early - hopefully my edits will pass muster!--PoussinChevre (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    ::@
    WP:COI. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 18:43, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Comment: Ah! This is very helpful - thank you. Am I still able to submit edits for reevaluation or should I just pack it in and head over to Articles for creation?--PoussinChevre (talk) 18:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    My first instinct is to suggest to post all strong and meaningful references that you believe suggest notability of the subject straight here as a comment, but I will let more experienced users suggest the best course of action. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 18:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Use the article talk page for suggestions. The Afd isn't really the place for COI discussions.
    talk) 19:17, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep. Needs work but consensus to keep. Tone 17:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Post–Turing machine

    AfDs for this article:
    Post–Turing machine (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)

    The article reads more like a research paper than an encyclopedia. Extensive clean-up is required to save this article.Dobbyelf62 (talk) 16:38, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you for notifying the author of the article. My apologies!Dobbyelf62 (talk) 17:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Redirect to
      WP:OR territory. In any case, what's here cannot stay. I wouldn't really be opposed to a delete either, but in case there's anything in here worth saving/merging, I wouldn't mind skipping that part. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:07, 28 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 17:32, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    List of last words in fiction

    List of last words in fiction (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)

    A massive list of random examples of the last things fictional characters have said. Most of the examples are unsourced, and those that are sourced are only using the pieces of fiction themselves. There is no actual sourcing being used at all to discuss the concept as a whole, and I'm not finding any that talk about the concept in any kind of set that would allow this to pass

    WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Rorshacma (talk) 16:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • WRT merging into List of last words - I have several concerns with that.
    • All the entries in List of last words are supposed to be the last words of real people.
    • The List of last words article is, itself, a mess.
      • Lots of entries in that list may be documentable, but are totally uninteresting
      • Lots of entries in that list may be documentable, but lack the context that would make them worth covering. Consider the entry for George V:
    "God damn you!"[31][177][note 41]
    — George V, king of the United Kingdom (20 January 1936), to a nurse giving him a sedative
    Cursing the nurse giving him an injection is a lot more interesting when one knows that is generally accepted that his family and doctor "hurried on" the death of the very ill King with an overdose. The King was not looking for a hotshot, so this may have been, well, murder.
    I know merges of articles on related topics seems so natural to some people that they are mystified when asked to explain them. I don't see it. I don't see why the merge makes sense. I think my rewrite is policy compliant. And I think List of last words is a mess, would require a lot of work to fix. Geo Swan (talk) 02:55, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd say the discussion here could likely be used as a consensus to TNT that article. Combining both stubs and working to define proper inclusion criteria while also trying to set up some kind of structure for actual discussion on the significance of last words in both real life and fiction would likely be the best course of action for both lists. TTN (talk) 02:59, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete: This lasted for over a year...   // Timothy :: talk  17:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete as
      WP:IINFO. Fictional characters die frequently and they all have "last words". Shooterwalker (talk) 03:24, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Delete - How is this encyclopedic? Why does it exist? Is there a single article from a reliable secondary source devoted to this topic that isn't a clickbait list? Do even the biggest of film buffs care? Darkknight2149 10:36, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete: Open and shut case. Every reason why has already been covered above. Don't understand the discussing. Normal Op (talk) 19:29, 2 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Luca Gaetani Lovatelli

    Luca Gaetani Lovatelli (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 subject with dubious claims such as being 'one of the most famous wine producers in Italy', which is backed by a single source (in Arabic, for whatever reason that might be). Quite possibly an article created initially as a promotional piece for the subject's family wine business. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 16:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep
      talk) 22:22, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]

    and when you search by his name you will find some articles about him and more of it about his brother and his family → https://www.google.com/search?q=conte+Luca+Gaetani+Lovatelli+dell%27Aquila+D%27+Aragona&rlz=1C1VFKB_enEG607EG607&ei=7StMX_38B6GDjLsP2ZaE4Ag&start=10&sa=N&ved=2ahUKEwi9p4zKgMTrAhWhAWMBHVkLAYwQ8tMDegQIFxAw&biw=1464&bih=706

    talk) 22:49, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Comment. As the guidelines at
    WP:NOTINHERITED make clear, being part of a notable family is not enough to justify a Wikipedia page. For this page to remain, it would be necessary to show that Luca Gaetani Lovatelli has had significant coverage as an individual person. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 08:56, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Gil Waugh

    Gil Waugh (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)

    Completely unreferenced

    primary sources and not support for notability. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have much better references than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:57, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:56, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    ID Africa

    ID Africa (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)

    UPE article where article creator is now blocked, created for an organization that doesn’t possess

    WP:CORP. Celestina007 15:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete Indeed. Looking at all the sources that were chosen to include in the article, many of them share content with each other as well as with other sources. I can find the same cited content appearing under the byline of Opeyemi Kehinde on the Daily Trust site, Ugo Onwuaso on the Nigeria Communications Week site, AwesomeCon on Brand Communications, Raheem Akingbolu on This Day Live, and gnadmin on Good News Nigeria. Some of the sources consist of content replicated on other sites under the byline BHM, which is the marketing company behind this operation. All of this, in addition to the clear PR feel of all these pieces, demonstrates that the sources are all PR-generated material, not independent, reliable sources. Largoplazo (talk) 16:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete:
      WP:BEFORE show this doesn't exist.   // Timothy :: talk  04:14, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to Chinabank. Tone 17:32, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    China Bank Binondo Business Center

    China Bank Binondo Business Center (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 does not meet

    WP:IS.   // Timothy :: talk  16:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  16:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 15:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • Merge important contents (esp. completion date of the building) to Chinabank and redirect. Add section on the former and current headquarters of the bank at the mother article which might serve as a guide for those who might want to upload photos of those buildings to Wikimedia sites (Commons doesn't allow photos of modern or post-November 1972 buildings from the Philippines where the copyright law has no-FoP provision). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Merge It seems like there should be more coverage of such an historic building, but there isn't much readily accessible online, except on the bank's website. So Merge into Chinabank per above. MB 01:56, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Merge: My first choice is delete, but Merge is acceptable as a second choice.   // Timothy :: talk  02:51, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete because it was a copyvio listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days, not because of any consensus or lack thereof here. MER-C 17:11, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Studio for Interrelated Media

    Studio for Interrelated Media (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 academic department at a college. Searches show almost no coverage other than from the college itself. The article is basically an unreferenced ad for the department. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:14, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note significant text lifted from here. I leave it for someone else to judge whether it's G12. It's currently G11 ish but I haven't had time to look for sources to see if content issues can be fixed. StarM 02:11, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Fiùran

    Fiùran (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

    blogs and primary sources and YouTube videos and the internet/college radio streams -- the closest thing to a strong source here is three different citations to one obscure music magazine which would be fine if the other sources around it were better, but isn't widely circulated enough to singlehandedly get a topic over GNG all by itself if it's the only acceptable source on offer. Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have more and better media coverage than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:54, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Femi Falodun

    Femi Falodun (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 a UPE article where article creator is now blocked, for a subject who lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources. Fails to satisfy

    WP:ANYBIO. A before search reveals nothing concrete to substantiate or prove notability Celestina007 15:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 15:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. No evidence of anything approaching notability. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 16:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete another in a very long line of articles on non-notable marketing businesspeople.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:04, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete Fails guidelines mentioned by nom. BEFORE showed promo pieces, nothing that meets SIGCOV.   // Timothy :: talk  02:36, 3 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 17:32, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Nigar Talibova

    AfDs for this article:
    Nigar Talibova (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. evrifaessa ❯❯❯ talk 15:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. evrifaessa ❯❯❯ talk 15:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. evrifaessa ❯❯❯ talk 15:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. evrifaessa ❯❯❯ talk 15:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. evrifaessa ❯❯❯ talk 15:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. evrifaessa ❯❯❯ talk 15:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete I cannot fully evaluate Azerbaijani sources, but since she's based in Turkey (at least that's what the article claims) I tried to look up for Turkish sources and I couldn't find any. It seems that she doesn't have a notable career to begin with. Keivan.fTalk 22:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete no evidence she is notable as a model or as a singer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:36, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - I concur with one of the voters above that there might be an issue with Turkish, Azerbaijani, and English spellings of this woman's name. In English I can find nothing on her band; and as a model she is only present in the typical social media promotions and modeling industry directories. It turns out that she is also known as Nigar Alptekin, and her husband is mixed up in a scandal involving Trump crony Michael Flynn. This article: [21] mentions her briefly as the wife while also explaining that she has gained very little notice as a model or musician (third paragraph from the bottom). ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 01:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I found the following sources in Turkish (only from major publishers): [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], but these sources are mostly about her going on vacation at X city or becoming a mother, not about her career or anything. In Azerbaijani I found this article about multiple famous Azerbaijani women where she is also included.
      ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 07:39, 2 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Andrea Jennifer Shubert

    Andrea Jennifer Shubert (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 stumbled across this article by chance while trying to find out when the studio Genetic Anomalies was disestablished by THQ. I added some details from the source that connects the two topics, but unfortunately could not find anything else on Shubert.

    The source linked above and this one are the only ones in the article. Both include only some routine coverage of Play140 and name some very basic points:

    • Her name is Andrea Shubert
    • Shubert's former name
    • Shubert co-conceived Acrophobia in 1995
    • Shubert worked at Genetic Anomalies once
    • Shubert co-founded Play140 in 2009

    Unfortunately, there seems to be no source for the middle name, the birth date, or any other claim made in the article. Most content was unsourced since the article's creation in 2009.

    WP:XY, possible redirect targets are Acrophobia and Chron X, but neither is better than the other. IceWelder [✉] 15:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. IceWelder [✉] 15:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. IceWelder [✉] 15:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. IceWelder [✉] 15:31, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Kamala Harris citizenship conspiracy theories

    Kamala Harris citizenship conspiracy theories (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)

    Propose redirecting to

    WP:UNDUE
    coverage of the fringe theory.

    Others on the talk page have favored such an approach. We floated

    John C. Eastman#Kamala Harris citizenship conspiracy theory or Kamala Harris as possibilities, but I was convinced that Natural-born-citizen clause#Kamala Harris
    is the best choice, since that article also lists people in similar situations.

    Finally, I do not see any need to merge anything from this article. Coverage at my proposed section is proportional and adequately searched. I'm only not proposing outright deletion since the title will remain a helpful search term for readers. BDD (talk) 15:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. BDD (talk) 15:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. BDD (talk) 15:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    comment I don't agree with Maile's trying to axe a disambig page, as there are certainly non-Obama uses of the term even if his is still the most prominent topic. Certainly not as a means of presupposing the deletion of this Kamala Harris birtherism article. The only reason not to have birtherism (disambiguation) is if
    birtherism itself expands from a redirect into that disambig, instead of being an Obama conspiracy redirect. Our and the media's lumping the Kamala objections in with Obama's ("conspiracy") seems racist because there hasn't been any "Kamala wasn't born in California" whispers like there were "Barack wasn't born in Hawaii" ones. That's why the Obama memes deserve to be called CTs while the Harris memes do not. There are entirely different forms of "birther" arguments for the two: BO was "was he born here?" whereas KH is "does 14th amendment apply to those who are already inherently subjects of Jamaica?" I would say the reason the Kamala objection needs an article while McCain's objection does not is because it's already gotten far more exposure than McCain's dilemma ever did throughout his entire campaign. 64.228.90.251 (talk) 22:57, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    The article is, in fact, not undergoing a rename discussion. I waited for the RM to close before nominating. --BDD (talk) 15:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: this argument seems misconceived. This is no a "conspiracy theory", an example of "fringe nuttery" or "racism". It is just a conservative legal argument.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete or Redirect to Natural-born-citizen clause#Kamala Harris. We don't need a stand-alone article for each piece of mud thrown in an election. Related, I've put Birtherism (disambiguation) up for AFD. We don't need articles and disambiguation pages for every word or phrase that pops up in an election year. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid. — Maile (talk) 23:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The whole issue is the politics of distraction, which seems to be the norm in every election now. The same issue came up with John McCain 2008 presidential campaign#Eligibility, and he was national hero. In his case, the mention of it did not merit its own article, but is one lone section in the article about his Presidential campaign. — Maile (talk) 13:48, 30 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Omar Alberto Rupp

    Omar Alberto Rupp (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 fails

    WP:GNG, as the subject is notable for only one event. This content could easily be merged into the ARA Narwal article. Lettlerhello 15:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello 15:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello 15:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello 15:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete Being killed in a conflict doesn't make you notable. ARA Narwal article already contains all its content. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete lacks WP:SIGCOV in multiple WP:RS so fails
      WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 04:03, 28 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Digital strategy

    AfDs for this article:
    Digital strategy (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 poorly sourced article is a rambling essay about nothing much. It disguises its banality in a bewildering fog of

    marketing buzzwords. Most of the sources are blogs and/or seem unrelated. Although I can find hits for the phrase "digital strategy" it is difficult to determine if they are related because this article is so vague and confusing and, frequently, so are those hits. Reyk YO! 14:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. - hako9 (talk) 15:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. - hako9 (talk) 15:01, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep. Tone 15:27, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Mayfield Mall

    Mayfield Mall (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)

    An extinct mall turned into a private office complex. The article does not meet

    WP:ROUTINE coverage of events and directory style listings.   // Timothy :: talk  03:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  03:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  03:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  04:01, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep. (I've also brought this article closer to where I'd have it now if I'd made this for DYK this year, not 2015, with additional citations and references.) While this particular center falls below the suggested gross leasable area threshold, I believe the property has enough notable media coverage (some of which I've been able to add in the new citations), and I believe it passes GNG because of its claim to being the first enclosed and carpeted center in the US (I don't buy it, but...), presence of the largest suburban JCPenney for its time, and association with Google (which makes it a favorite of news articles talking about mall reuse). The latter is particularly unusual for a mall.
      t • c) 04:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep well sourced and well written article which meets our guideline for
      BizJournals. It is also relevant and notable that the mall was rented and purchased by Google. Lightburst (talk) 15:47, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Keep per above, the existing sourcing is more than sufficient to establish notability. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:38, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply:This is an article about a mall. How is a mall that becomes an office complex still a mall? It might be relevant to an article about mall reuse, but this is an article about Mayfield Mall, not an office complex. But in either case none of the sources in the article demonstrate notability for a mall or an office complex. They are just routine news articles. Nothing that supports
      WP:NBUILD
      : "Buildings, including private residences and commercial developments, may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish. notability."
    • " How is a mall that becomes an office complex still a mall?" Because things stop being notable once they no longer exist, right? The sourcing is about the mall and the office complex that replaced it, indicating it as a noteworthy conversion that merits discussion. Knock this off right now, you're clearly
      disrupting just to make a point and doubling down when it's clear that you're not getting your way. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Keep Per Lightburst's reasoning above. More than enough reliable sources. Esw01407 (talk) 21:53, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep Meets GNG, easy to find more sources like this one with interesting info on the grand opening that should go in the article. MB 23:53, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • CommentThe sources above and in the article are all routine run of the mill coverage and announcements. They do not establish notability. Every mall will have lots of routine coverage because they seek it out as advertising. If this type of coverage makes a mall notable, then every mall will be notable.   // Timothy :: talk  02:21, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Has every mall been turned into offices for Google? That's an absolutely unique and notable ending for a mall.
      WP:ROUTINE does not apply to buildings. Badgering editors when it's clear the tide is turned against you is completely useless. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      WP:ROUTINE. Not saying that it's true, just that I think that's the policy Timothy is trying to apply. GeneralNotability (talk) 01:54, 1 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep. Consensus is that the sources found by Calliopejen1 show the article should be retained and improved Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:37, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Hawthorne Plaza Shopping Center

    Hawthorne Plaza Shopping Center (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)

    The article does not meet

    WP:ROUTINE coverage of events and directory style listings.   // Timothy :: talk  03:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  03:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  03:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  03:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep Seems to be a development that was significant to the city and attracted sustained coverage over time. According to the LA Times (1990), the plaza contributed 15% of Hawthorne's sales tax revenue. Significant coverage includes:
    Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Also note that the article contains additional reliable sources that I think have been unfairly characterized by the nominator. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep per coverage above and already in article, sourcing is more than sufficient. Also further asserted in use of the former building in several movie and TV shows. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The above are all routine news coverage that any mall would receive; it does not demonstrate notability.
      WP:NBUILD says that ""Buildings, including private residences and commercial developments, may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability." Nothing above touches on historic, social, or architectural importance (and significant coverage means addressing the subject directly and in depth). Economic significance is refuted by the fact that it is a dead mall. If someone disagrees, please state which sources show historic, social, economic, or architectural importance.   // Timothy :: talk  03:47, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • @TimothyBlue: You really don't think that "used in a ton of movies and TV shows" is "historical or social importance", nor the fact that a structure in a major city has been sitting abandoned for 21 years? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply: No I don't. Being a movie set for several movies is not historic (especially in Los Angeles) and what social importance does being a movie set for a few days have? What social impact did being a movie set have? Being an abandoned property for 21 years is not notable, if anything it shows how unnotable the mall is.   // Timothy :: talk  04:04, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply: Don't be sarcastic, I gave you an honest reply. Guidelines are not just random arbitrary statements, there is a purpose to them. I see this as wheat and chaff. If we have 2000 articles for American malls (don't know the actual number), but only 200 are genuinely noteworthy, the 200 (10%) will be obscured by the other 1800 (90%). Removing non-notable malls, helps the visibility of notable ones. If all readers see when they look at malls, is open, renovate, close, boring routine items, they will miss the truly interesting and noteworthy malls. I believe this is what
      WP:NBUILD
      is going for when it says "may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance".
    • Is there some historical importance, such as the malls that were the first of their kind? I'm thinking here of the same way department stores are viewed, every department store is not notable, but the first department stores were pioneers, those have a history that is interesting and notable.
    • Social, a small/average mall in an urban area not socially notable, it's just one among a vast array of social environments. But a mall in a small town may be the center of the community and a significant part of the social fabric, not duplicated in other places.
    • Architectural speaks for itself, there are lots of architectural journals and magazines and if they cover a mall because of its design, then I see that as an indication something about the mall is notable and this can be in the article.
    • Economic, I'd go to the social reason above. A mall in a large urban area is going to make a negligible impact on the economy, even if it makes good money. But a mall in a small town may be a significant part of the local economy, even if it makes a fraction of the money the mall in an urban area does. In the same way as a factory in a city with a huge manufacturing base like Los Angeles or New York wouldn't be notable, but if you move that same factory to a small town, it could be the lifeblood of the economy, if it closed the town would (and sadly have) dry up.
      // Timothy :: talk  04:23, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    *"Historical": "every department store is not notable, but the first department stores were pioneers." So by that logic, Bon Marche in Paris is notable because it was a first, whereas Kohl's, Burlington, and J.C. Penney aren't notable at all because they weren't the first of anything nor did they pioneer anything.
    "separating the wheat from the chaff.... helps the visibility of notable ones." That's like saying that a musician who never entered the Hot 100 (for example
    WP:GA) should be deleted so that an article on, say, Maroon 5 or Metallica
    can have its visibility helped, whatever that means. Because by your standards, the Forester Sisters were just a "routine" band who routinely got together, routinely released singles and albums, routinely got reviews from routine music reviewers, and routinely broke up like most other bands do.
    "it's just one among a vast array of social environment". So by your logic, Northland Center is notable because it was one of the first and a "pioneer", whereas literally every other mall in Metro Detroit is "just one among a vast array" and therefore not notable. Not even the one that had the very first American Eagle Outfitters in it, huh? Because it's in a mall that's "just one among a vast array" by not being notable in any other fashion.
    "Architectural speaks for itself". Not every structure has to be architecturally notable. Again, I guess that means that Forest Fair Village is just another run-of-the-mill, routine mall that routinely got built and routinely died because it didn't have anything significant from a structural standpoint.
    " A mall in a large urban area is going to make a negligible impact on the economy, even if it makes good money." How much is non negligible by your standards? Is Colonial Plaza no longer notable because it got torn down? Rolling Acres Mall is not notable because it didn't make enough money and failed?
    If you contrast
    WP:GNG. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Reply First, these are not my standards. I am discussing it from the guidelines.
    The
    WP:NBUILD is not an all of the above requirement. Le Bon Marché
    may (I haven't looked) have importance architecturally or historically. JC Penny may be notable due to social or historic reasons, even though it is failing economically and their store (as far as I know) have no architectural importance. This will be reflected in the sources.
    If something is important architecturally it will be covered by architectural journals and magazines, or by articles from historical preservation societies. The same is true about economics; if something is economically significant it will be reflected in the sources. I don't have a standard,
    WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
    .
    When you attempt to get personal with comments such the ones above, you're only showing emotion that betrays the weakness of your reasoning and evidence.   // Timothy :: talk  05:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep. The sources that Calliopejen1 presented above show that there is pretty significant coverage for this topic. I disagree with the nominator that "If all readers see when they look at malls, is open, renovate, close, boring routine items, they will miss the truly interesting and noteworthy malls." Notability is not assessed in relation to other subjects, and openings, renovations, and closures are not necessarily "routine". These sources show that there's some pretty specific coverage of this mall in third-party reliable sources, which is enough to meet
      WP:NBUILD, "Buildings, including private residences and commercial developments, may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability." The requirement is that such buildings need significant coverage by reliable third-party sources. Historical, social, economic, or architectural significance is an ancillary, and will be demonstrated by whether the topic meets the GNG. epicgenius (talk) 18:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Reply: None of the sources provides any evidence of mall meeting
      WP:NBUILD
      . It's all routine coverage or promo pieces. You could find articles like these for every single mall. These sources show that this was just an average mall; a number of people have looked and none have come up with a single source that shows this mall has historic, social, economic, or architectural importance. It was so completely average that even when some people tried to revive it, the plans failed.
    Source assessment table:
    Source
    Independent?
    		 Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward
    GNG
    ?
    "Hawthorne Plaza". The Daily Breeze. Yes Yes No Dead Link ✘ No
    Construction Under Way at Hawthorne Plaza Site". Los Angeles Times. Yes Yes No Dead link ✘ No
    Jeff Arellano (October 2, 2005). "Hawthorne Mall: Hawthorne California". Yes Yes No It's a simple blog entry on a site about Dead Malls. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    Williams, J (30 June 2014). "Watch: Exploring the Spooky Abandoned Hawthorne Mall". Yes Yes No One paragraph promo about "Tom goes inside the abandoned Hawthorne Plaza mall" Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    Hernandez, Miriam (19 November 2014). "Hawthorne staging comeback with outlet mall". KABC-TV. Yes Yes No Short routine coverage about a possible plan to become an outlet mall. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    Mazza, Sandy (18 February 2016). "Ambitious new plans emerge for abandoned Hawthorne Plaza mall". Daily Breeze Yes Yes No Dead link ✘ No
    "Hawthorne Happenings March 10, 2016". City of Hawthorne. 10 March 2016. No Financial interest in tax revenue No It's a city community events calendar page No It says nothing about the mall ✘ No
    azza, Sandy (12 February 2018). "Makeover of decrepit Hawthorne Plaza Mall canceled again". The Daily Breeze. Yes Yes No Dead link ✘ No
    This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
    Source assessment table:
    Source
    Independent?
    		 Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward
    GNG
    ?
    Kowsky, Kim. "YOU ARE HERE Reaching Out to an Ethnically Mixed Clientele: [South Bay Edition]." Los Angeles Times Yes Yes No Routine coverage any mall would receive. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    Gnerre, Sam. "SOUTH BAY HISTORY: Hawthorne Plaza." Daily Breeze Yes Yes No Routine coverage any mall would receive. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    Sandell, Scott. "Hawthorne Plaza Shops Around for a Way to Survive Slump Retail...Los Angeles Times Yes Yes No Routine coverage any mall would receive. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    Glover, Kara and Anne Rackham. "Hawthorne Mall Faces an Uncertain Future." Los Angeles Business Yes Yes No Routine coverage any mall would receive. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    Mazza, Sandy. "Hawthorne Mall Stalls Over Housing." Daily Breeze, Oct 10, 2010. Yes Yes No Is not about the mall. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    "Shopper's Paradise each Center Tries to Carve its Niche with Own Personality: [South Bay Edition]." Los Angeles Times Yes Yes No Short promo piece. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    Mazza, Sandy. "Mall Makeover Mired in Debate." Daily Breeze, Jun 22, 2008 Yes Yes No Is not about the mall. Its about a stalled plan to possibly make over the mall. Provides no evidence of mall meeting
    WP:NBUILD
    		 ✘ No
    This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
    There is nothing here that shows this former mall meets
    WP:NBUILD.   // Timothy :: talk  11:35, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Keep per sources in the article and above. MB 23:21, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The sources above and in the article are all routine run of the mill coverage and announcements. They do not establish notability. Every mall will have lots of routine coverage because they seek it out as advertising. If this type of coverage makes a mall notable, then every mall will be notable.   // Timothy :: talk  02:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Then let it? Notability has been established for "run of the mill" plazas on here because of having reliable sources (newspapers) and verifiability. Anchor stores are usually the long term leasees of the property. Depending on the anchor store, they might have also bought the overall land. That information usually suffices
      WP:GNG. – The Grid (talk) 02:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • I got curious for possible sources:
    Some of the sources accessed can be removed but note
    WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. I vote keep on the sources that can be obtained. – The Grid (talk) 12:50, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Comment for closer: since there is an RfC currently under discussion at AfD about what is considered proper sourcing for determining mall notabiity, it may be worth holding these open until that is finished. If a close is made, it would be very helpful for the RfC if you could explain how you evaluated the sources in terms of notability, routine, run of the mill coverage, and how you feel voting and !voting influenced this AfD. Thank you,   // Timothy :: talk  09:16, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @
      WP:AN that that's not a reason to keep the AFD open longer. Let these discussions run their course. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    That was the opinion of a single individual, not a consensus. At ANI the consensus in the close was stated, "You and others suggested, reasonably, that some the guidelines for malls should be developed and clarified, and in fact constructive discussion about a potential WP:SNG is ongoing at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#RfC on shopping malls and notability guidelines.". Let the closer have all of the information and they can decide. There is no hurry to close these only to have them reopened at DR as a result of the RfC.   // Timothy :: talk  20:31, 4 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:17, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    A1 B-boy Sasa

    A1 B-boy Sasa (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 dancer with non-verifiable claims to being "the first B-boy hip-hop dancer", "retired having never lost a B-boy battle" or "helped push B-boy breakdancing into the mass media as hip-hop". Written like a promotional piece. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 13:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. - hako9 (talk) 15:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions. - hako9 (talk) 15:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. - hako9 (talk) 15:03, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:17, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Pokhara Industrial Estate

    Pokhara Industrial Estate (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)

    Reviewed under new article curation / NPP. No indication of wp:notability. No GNG suitable sources given and I couldn't find any. No SNG basis. Appears to be a small industrial park. North8000 (talk) 12:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Delete: Fails

    WP:GNG. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 17:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:06, 28 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:17, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Ean Golden

    Ean Golden (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)

    BLP notability and sourcing issues, reads like PR Acousmana (talk) 12:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Acousmana (talk) 12:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:20, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:20, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The reference isn't Mixmag, it's www.remixmag.com: and it's an article written by the subject of this AfD. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 07:48, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I checked said refs before deleting, none were suitable
    WP:RS cites for a BLP article. Acousmana (talk) 20:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    It confirms he wrote for them so is an acceptable reference for that.Also being a near-orphan has got nothing to do with notability, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:12, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    it's a nothing source, simply not usable in this instance. Acousmana (talk) 20:20, 1 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep. Consensus is that the publication is notable, and of note is that no participants here have agreed with the statement in the nomination that the article constitutes advertising. North America1000 14:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Paletten

    AfDs for this article:
    Paletten (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)

    Blatant advertising, lacking references/sources. Gardenchef19 (talk) 12:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 15:25, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Fredrik Svensk

    Fredrik Svensk (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 is blatant promotion (as pointed before by other users), lacks references/sources Gardenchef19 (talk) 12:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly
      Talk to my owner:Online 12:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 15:24, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep, withdrawn with no dissenting opinions. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:18, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Aleksey Kokel

    Aleksey Kokel (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 to meet

    WP:BIO. Artist known locally in his community with no international or nationwide recognition. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 12:43, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: First source is a passing mention in a book that is devoted to
    Chuvash Republic government site[10][11], which is obviously not a reliable source. One is a reference to a statement commemorating the artist by the National Museum of the Chuchav Republic[12]. There is also another source that is a passing mention (artist referenced to 1 page) in a 420 page book[13]. Four links are dead[14][15][16][17]. One reference is to a catalogue of the artist's work[18]. One is to a open Russian database of artists[19]. That's pretty much what the Russians sources are. P.S @Eostrix: If there is a more streamlined or efficient way to comment with the references and evidence of non-notability please let me know, I'm new around here! Nearlyevil665 (talk) 12:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Being catalogued and being honored by a state government (Chuvashia) are also signs of notability. There are a whole lot of hits in google books for Кокель 1880 (most of which refer to this artist).--Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 13:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    You misunderstood. He wasn't honoured by the Chuvash Republic. There were simply references to him on their government website, which was most likely for the purposes of promoting tourism to their region. Those two links are now dead too, by the way. There is no way to confirm what those government website references constituted, but my best guess is that it would be promotional. As for the cataloging, that too is blatantly non-notable. It was for a catalog produced in 1960 for the exhibition of the artist's works. Any artist that has ever had an exhibition could produce a reference to their own catalog of works. There is nothing to suggest that this particular catalog was of any note, quite the contrary. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 13:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    In regards to "Any artist that has ever had an exhibition could produce a reference to their own catalog of works", as Kokel was dead and buried for four years in 1960 it would be quite a feat (a miracle, even) for him to produce his own catalog for the exhibition.--Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 13:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I stand corrected it would have taken necromancy for the man to produce his own catalog being dead and all, but I'm still not convinced a catalog produced for what appears to be a dubious local exhibition evidence in support of notability for said artist. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 15:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep Kokel created significant body of work that was the primary subject of Васильев, В. А (2009). Алексей Афанасьевич Кокель: 1880-1956 : жызнь и творчество (in Russian). Чебоксары: Издател'скии Дом "Пегас".
      OCLC 775591819. Vexations (talk) 15:25, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]

    References

    1. ^ https://www.cbc.ca/mediacentre/press-release/cbc-greenlights-new-original-drama-feudal-a-raucous-east-coast-tale-of-lust
    2. ^ https://www.facebook.com/FaridYazdani
    3. ^ https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1008903
    4. ^ https://www.cbc.ca/mediacentre/press-release/cbc-greenlights-new-original-drama-feudal-a-raucous-east-coast-tale-of-lust
    5. ^ https://www.theifp.ca/community-story/9136394-around-town-farid-yazdani/
    6. ^ https://www.cp24.com/video?clipId=1008903
    7. ^ https://www.cp24.com/video?clipId=1388940
    8. ^ https://www.cp24.com/video?clipId=1446430
    9. ^ https://www.canadiancomedyawards.org/archives.php?year=2017
    10. ^ http://gov.cap.ru/hierarhy.asp?page=./299/2899/48887/72612/73213
    11. ^ http://gov.cap.ru/hierarhy.asp?page=./5032/11628/46625/74572
    12. ^ http://www.lib.cap.ru/kokel3.asp
    13. ^ https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C,_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%90%D1%84%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87#cite_ref-_1ebe5826ac261ff7_8-0
    14. ^ http://interkavkaz.info/image/350_%d0%9a%d0%be%d0%ba%d0%b5%d0%bb%d1%8c_%d0%90%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%81%d0%b5%d0%b9_%d0%90%d1%84%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b0%d1%81%d1%8c%d0%b5%d0%b2%d0%b8%d1%87
    15. ^ http://www.culture21.ru/Page.aspx?orgid=385&page=./54/4042
    16. ^ http://www.cheb.ru/history/street/kokel.htm
    17. ^ http://artru.info/ar/18988/
    18. ^ https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C,_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%90%D1%84%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87#cite_ref-7
    19. ^ https://experimental.worldcat.org/fast/1657246/
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
    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 keep. Tone 15:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Margaret Lindsay Ramsay

    Margaret Lindsay Ramsay (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 demonstrated notability other than being the daughter of

    WP:NOTINHERITED. Should either be deleted or possibly merged with Allan Ramsay. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 12:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 15:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep I did a brief search and turned up three sources, which confirmed the birth date and death and the elopement date. If I can find such information almost 300 years after her birth, I think she is likely notable.
      talk) 06:04, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    Comment: She is notable for the mere fact of having her DOB/DOD documented in secondary sources? Context matters - All sources that do mention her (or her DOB/DOD) establish no significance or notability other than her posing and serving as a muse to her notable husband, Allan Ramsay. Her elopement too would have not been recorded if the notable husband was out of the equation. I strongly suggest a merge with Allan Ramsay, if not an outright delete. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 06:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a lot more than her DOB documented in the sources. I've analyzed a lot of articles for AfD, and yes , I think there's enough here. Expectations are typically a little lower for those who have been dead for 300 years.
    talk) 06:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Comment. Previous AfD discussion mentions coverage in Mitchell's Women in Scotland, 1660-1780 and in Barker and Challis's Women's History: Britain, 1700-1850. Can't find these on Google books - can anyone give more info about the mentions there? Tacyarg (talk) 07:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Was kept at previous AfD in 2008, under different title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Margaret Lindsay (1726 - 1782). (Can someone please add this as the box which should appear at top of this AfD?) PamD 08:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep: portrait is in Scottish National Gallery, a reader is likely to look her up to find out more about her, we have sourced content. Seems notable and encyclopedic. PamD 08:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep I found Barker and Chalus' book on Google where there are (for me) three sentences about her that I could see (about Lindsay herself rather than her husband or relatives). This book references "Virgins and Viragos" by Rosalind Kay Marshall where the snippet I see shows an index entry for her under the name Lindsay as a "see also" to her husband's entry. There is a great deal about her in, for example, "The life and art of Allan Ramsay" by Alistair Smart available on the Internet Archive.[36]
      WP:NOTINHERITED is not a policy or guideline. It is advice as to what arguments are best avoided in deletion discussions and so is somewhat premature when referred to in an AFD nomination. It decidedly does not say that relatives of notable people are not notable or even that they are not notable if they would not have been written about except for their famous relatives. Her elopement too would have not been recorded if the notable husband was out of the equation is an inappropriate argument to be making. As always we look for sources about the person themselves and in this case the sources seem entirely suitable for our purpose. Thincat (talk) 09:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Delete The nominator’s rationale stands. What exactly did she do besides exist a few centuries ago? It’s not like she was the subject of a famous work, so being in a gallery isn’t relevant to independent notability that is unable to be established. Trillfendi (talk) 17:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep. She's notable because reliable, independent sources took note of her. Notability is not temporary, and noted people need not accomplish great feats. pburka (talk) 17:23, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep. Per Pam and Thincat. Tacyarg (talk) 08:24, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep per PamD and others - notability is just about met, this article is potentially useful, and it's doing no harm (very unlikely to be UPE or an SEO scam after 300 years...) GirthSummit (blether) 15:13, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep per Thincat. and also it would be a great help to others to find details about her and i think there is no personal interest as the person died, I suggest to update it properly Onmyway22 (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Commbox

    Commbox (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 upto Wikipedia standard.

    Coriannakox (talk) 12:29, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the
    Coriannakox (talk) 12:29, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:55, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Darius Saluga

    Darius Saluga (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)

    Doesn't seem to meet general notability and

    WP:NBOX criteria. Nearlyevil665 (talk) 12:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 12:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lithuania-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 12:28, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was no consensus. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Stav Beger

    Stav Beger (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 producer. Fails

    WP:SIGCOV scope_creepTalk 21:41, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The consensus is there must be real coverage to
    WP:NMUSIC, which is not there. Passing mentions doesn't cover it, and that's all I can see. scope_creepTalk 09:28, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Don't think so. It looks like PR. scope_creepTalk 20:21, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beger is one of Israel's prominent music producers and songwriters and responsible to some of the major hits in the recent years. The above mentioned article is in Yedioth Ahronoth, it's exclusively about Beger and it's not pr, there is also almost an hour intreview with him in Kan. Tzahy (talk) 04:17, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Where is the rest of the coverage, that should be visible for a
    WP:SIGCOV. Where is the in-depth, intellectually independent secondary sources that are needed to establish notabilty. That article does look PR. Stating he is notable, without evidence isn't ideal. scope_creepTalk 09:43, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Yedioth Ahronoth has a wall, and the full article is unfold only to paying subsribers, just like the
    WSJ. Tzahy (talk) 17:20, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    So far there is nothing substantial been shown. Lots of conjecture about being notable, but no evidence. scope_creepTalk 11:27, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 18:22, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:20, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete per nomination. While he may be prolific and influential, there simply doesn't appear to be sufficient independent, third-party coverage of him to pass
      WP:ANYBIO. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to Deemed university. North America1000 14:12, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Medical deemed universities

    Medical deemed universities (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)

    The deemed university is a type of degree-granting institution in India. There are several engineering colleges, medical colleges, liberal arts colleges, and many other specialized institution declared as 'deemed-to-be-university.' Hence, a separate article for 'Medical deemed universities' seems redundant. It should be redirected to deemed university page. Neurofreak (talk) 10:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 18:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:19, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. While there is sourcing that can verify information, there is a consensus that only the Inc article satisfies our

    criteria to establish notability. As such there is a delete consensus at this time. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    World Orphans

    World Orphans (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 think this fails

    CAT:NN since 2016. There was indeed a 2-page article in Inc about it in 2007: basically, World Orphans did not do its due diligence with overseas partners and ended up out $70k. Beyond that, there's not much else significant I can find. There's this in the Gaylord Herald Times (small local newspaper) and this (maybe an RS, but just a namedrop). I think this calls for a deletion discussion. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:39, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:39, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 03:39, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 18:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak keep agree there is multiple reliable sources covering this topic in sufficient depth, even if there's only two. - Scarpy (talk)

    18:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

    • Weak keep. Borderline but just about makes it. Johncdraper (talk) 09:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    HighKing has convinced me. Change to Delete Johncdraper (talk) 20:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    The inc piece has about four paragraphs of prose so does count for
    WP:ORGIND imv Atlantic306 (talk) 01:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Sure, littered with phrases which make it clear that the information was provided by Wiseman. For example, how could the author know whether Wiseman was "surprised" or not, or what he "wondered" about, etc. It fails
    HighKing++ 10:28, 29 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Ian Malcolm (councillor)

    Ian Malcolm (councillor) (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)

    The subject does not meet Notability (people), and Not a Directory. Local politician without any claim to national significance. Note that "Lord Mayor" is a ceremonial role taken up on a rotating basis by councillors; it contrasts with the role of the elected mayor (e.g. Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan). It is reliant on primary sources. The JPStalk to me 12:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete one source is not enough to show a passing of GNG. Especially when the source is from the subject's employer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete Fails NPOL, local politician. ~EDDY (talk/contribs)~ 20:21, 28 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Série Club

    Série Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats
    )

    Non notable television channel   Kadzi   (talk) 13:10, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Have a blessed day. 13:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep sources from
      WP:GNG. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio 12:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Redirect to
      chatter) 02:25, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:22, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    African Distillers

    African Distillers (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 doesn't seem to be notable since the article lacks sourcing and all I could find about it in a

    WP:NCORP. Plus, the article is kind of advertish. Adamant1 (talk) 04:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Zimbabwe-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:22, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    This non-trivial 50-page report on the company was just published and is highly likely to meet
    WP:CORPDEPTH; that it costs US$499 makes that no less true. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:22, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Relisting comment: Whilst there has been a considerable number of submissions, the sources cited relatively late in the debate deserve proper consideration.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 12:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete: Sustained trivial mentions in reports, news articles. QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 00:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep Producing 3/4th of the country's wine (per Toughpigs) is a strong indicator of notability. We should not expect US-standard sourcing to be readily available online for a Zimbabwean company. SD0001 (talk) 10:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No one here is expecting US-standards based sourcing to exist and it's ridiculous to claim we do. Let alone to try and act like articles about US subjects are the only ones that can meet such a low freaken bar as having two in-depth sources about them. Anywhere in the world should be able to meet that standard and it doesn't have jack to do with the US. It probably wasn't people in the US who came up with the guideline in the first place. American's aren't the only ones that speak English. Also, it's totally the soft bigotry of low exceptions to hold Zimbabwean companies to a lower standard then companies from anywhere else just "because Zimbabwe." There's plenty of extremely well sourced articles about Zimbabwean companies in Wikipedia. Including Old Mutual, Ecobank Zimbabwe, Bindura Nickel Corporation, etc etc, just to name a few. Not every damn article about something in Africa should be kept just because voters like you and ToughPigs have a slanted, clearly wrong opinion about the place. Some things, no matter where they are located, are just not notable. That's life, get over it and stop blaming Africans or Zimbabweans because something isn't notable (that mostly goes for ToughPigs, but also anyone else that feels like calling Africa about the level of journalism there. Whatever it is). --Adamant1 (talk) 12:39, 30 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:00, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    One Love (2009 film)

    One Love (2009 film) (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)

    Advertorialized article about a short film, not

    conflict of interest. Bearcat (talk) 17:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the
    list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio 12:01, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was merge to Nazarene Theological College (Australia). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:40, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Richard S. Taylor

    Richard S. Taylor (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:BEFORE shows no evidence of reliable, secondary, substantial coverage or academic work to help indicate notability. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:58, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    List of salaries of central bank governors

    List of salaries of central bank governors (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 policies on original research and lists Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:57, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Kgaswe School

    Kgaswe School (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)

    The article has been linked to a single primary source since at 2010 and I was unable to find the multiple in-depth reliable sources that would be needed for it to pass either

    WP:NORG. As an alternative to deletion the article could be merged or redirected to the article of the town where it's located Palapye, which already has an education section, or Independent Schools Association of Southern Africa. Merging or redirecting this to either one would fit the consensus about how to handle non-notable school articles. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:10, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:10, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 13:47, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:30, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was speedy delete as

    a copyright violation. A run through the copyvio detector shows that it was copied from the main university's synopsis of the school, which explains the promotional tone. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    School of Creative Studies and Media

    School of Creative Studies and Media (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)

    A department of Bangor University - did consider a redirect but the title is so generic it could be mistaken for any similar department in any university. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 10:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 10:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 10:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 10:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 10:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 10:39, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep.

    talk) 05:03, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Rajinder Singh (brigadier)

    Rajinder Singh (brigadier) (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)

    After having worked on this article recently and brought it to the current state it is in, I am having serious doubts about the notability of the person in question from a Wikipedia perspective. Yes, the event that he was part of was notable, so he can be mentioned there -

    Indo-Pakistani War of 1947–1948, or as a commander in the JK State forces/rifles article - Jammu and Kashmir Rifles
    , but as separate article, I am not so sure.
    As per
    talk) 10:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep (cross-posting from
      WP:NSOLDIER right there, btw) played a major role in a major world event. Saved a whole state for a country rather than the other, ensuring a conflict that's lasted to today? Has a postal stamp with his face? Has a village named after him, and schools (more than one Wikipedia notable entities)? Won second highest honour (ANYBIO), and has since received sustained coverage in multiple independent reliable sources (GNG) about his deeds and whether he should have been awarded the highest military award his country has to offer? As I said, too notable. Compare this with the articles we keep on internet influencers and domestic footballers. Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    This is exactly what I am talking about; everything about him is only related to 4 days in 1947; and not of his life as a whole. There are just too many large gaps about his life. His entire army life (except 4 days) is missing as well as his early life. We might as well called the article Rajinder Singh in October 1947.
    talk) 11:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I am sure the information is somewhere, in the personnel archives of the organisation he worked for, for example. Missing details, which is true of most historical figures, isn't enough reason to delete even if it is completely missing, IMO. Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:29, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was soft delete. Based on

    "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:52, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Daniel A. Ninivaggi

    Daniel A. Ninivaggi (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)

    Seeking consensus on a very close case on

    CAT:NN since 2016, presumably because the case is so close. I would have considered a redirect, but since he's been an exec at a number of companies there's no clear target. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:10, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:10, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:10, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete the coverage does not rise to the level that actually shows notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:13, 7 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:41, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Mahmoud Mohammad Tabrizi

    Mahmoud Mohammad Tabrizi (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)

    New page review: I’ve looked at this BLP several times. There are primary sources, interviews, non-notable awards and other references, but taken all together it does not amount to a GNG pass in my view. Mccapra (talk) 10:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 10:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 10:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 10:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete didn't find anything in a BEFORE search which would justify keeping. Fails GNG and BIO outright. JavaHurricane 11:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete it's not impossible that we're missing some coverage due to the difficulties of researching Iranian subjects, but that hunch isn't enough to justify keeping at this time. signed, Rosguill talk 15:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete There are no enough sources to maintain claim to notability. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 12:57, 29 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to Star Vijay. Tone 15:19, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Star Vijay Music

    Star Vijay Music (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)

    Television channel that does not exist yet, fails

    talk) 09:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Draftify, may become notable once it is launched after the pandemic. JavaHurricane 11:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Redirect to Star Vijay: Can be separated after it begins and receives coverage. Ab207 (talk) 17:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Redirect as per above Spiderone 14:50, 3 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:41, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Bay Club at Mattapoisett, Massachusetts

    The Bay Club at Mattapoisett, Massachusetts (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 subject of this article does not qualify with the general notability guidelines. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 09:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. Non-notable, unsourced spam.--Darwinek (talk) 12:30, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. Appears to be spam. I'm not finding coverage outside of real estate listing, primary sources, and a few spammy websites. Not notable. Hog Farm Bacon 15:39, 29 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 15:19, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Vconsol

    Vconsol (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)

    The page creator have added 30 refs. But if we look clearly - it is visible that all of the refs are news snippets from 20 August - 22 August about the software winning a competition round organised by Government of India. The application is even

    WP:1E. Zoodino (talk) 09:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Zoodino (talk) 09:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Zoodino (talk) 09:08, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:40, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Weston Group

    AfDs for this article:
    The Weston Group (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)

    The subject of this badly sourced article does not meet

    WP:NCORP and, even after extensive attempts to rewrite, the article is still an advertising brochure. The previous AfD closed as no consensus for want of participation, but the subject is no more notable now than it was then. My own searches turn up hits for unrelated organisations with the same name, but little to nothing about this one. Reyk YO! 08:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 14:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 14:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. A major
      WP:CORPDEPTH fail. Like the nominator, I only turned up SIGCOV for [47], which is not the same (full name is "George Weston Limited", not "The Weston Group LLC"). AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:30, 3 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:17, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Sukhveer Singh Bhadouriya

    Sukhveer Singh Bhadouriya (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)

    A

    WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable and independent sources. Zoodino (talk) 08:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Zoodino (talk) 08:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Zoodino (talk) 08:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Zoodino (talk) 08:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete: Definitely fails NPOL. Sources only make trivial mention, that too on a single event. Ab207 (talk) 17:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - zero evidence of notability Spiderone 10:39, 3 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep. BD2412 T 00:03, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Mr. Moseby

    AfDs for this article:
    Mr. Moseby (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)

    The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

    WP:PLOT). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:47, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:47, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 02:53, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:DPR#NAC
    , I, an uninvolved administrator, have vacated this closure and determine that the debate be relisted for a further one week from today.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,     Stifle (talk) 08:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    There actually was a lot more for all of the main characters while the program was actually airing. I don't know if it's a thing just with Disney programs or whether it occurs with all kids' TV programs but almost as soon as the program ended, sources started disappearing. Admittedly, a lot of the websites did start reorganising their content but it's almost as if they said "Well, that program has finished, we don't need this stuff any more" and dumped everything. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep Highly notable character who was a cornerstone of a highly notable 2000s Disney Channel Sitcom. Sources have become dead links over time. However, the character lives on in memes and nostalgia; and its clear that it had made Phill Lewis's career appearing in dozens of episodes with this unique character. DrewieStewie (talk) 13:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Can you cite any sources to show that "the character lives on in memes and nostalgia"? Because if all the sources saying that are now "dead", well, than it means the character no longer lives on. And while notability is not temporary, we need to be able to verify those old sources, otherwise it is just a claim that
        WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES. Or THEWERESOURCESBUTNOWTHEYAREGONE. C'mon. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:51, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Ideology of Tintin

    AfDs for this article:
    Ideology of Tintin (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 has been tagged for 8 years as

    WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES". Which hasn't happened in a decade plus. Sigh. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 16:49, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to

    (non-admin closure) ~ Amkgp 💬 17:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    San Theodoros

    San Theodoros (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 a fictional nation that appears in a few strips of

    WP:FANCRUFT description if this fictional country, a mention in the first book it appears in, which I think is The Broken Ear, should be sufficient; and at best this could be redirected to List of The Adventures of Tintin locations. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:39, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was keep. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:15, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Mikhail Pomortsev

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

    No sources, and nothing that indicates notability DiscoStu42 (talk) 06:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:50, 28 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was speedy keep. Discussion opened by a sock puppet. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Ghazi Hur Mujahid Faqeer Arbelo Katpar

    Ghazi Hur Mujahid Faqeer Arbelo Katpar (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)

    Does not meet

    WP:RS. The one cited source that comes closest to RS just mentions the person in the passing. Does not belong on English-language Wikipedia. Stefania0 (talk) 05:21, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Sandstein 11:02, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Nicktoons (Albanian TV channel)

    Nicktoons (Albanian TV channel) (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 fails

    WP:OR since March 2019, I’m not sure if these articles were fixed if the article would be worthy enough to save or if deletion is the best option for it. Pahiy (talk) 04:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Pahiy (talk) 04:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albania-related deletion discussions. Pahiy (talk) 04:59, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Freelanthropy

    Freelanthropy (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

    pre-AfD check, which I have added, but NCORP requires multiple sources to qualify. The other external links listed are either not independent or do not mention Freelanthropy except in passing. – Teratix ₵ 04:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. – Teratix ₵ 04:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. – Teratix ₵ 04:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. – Teratix ₵ 04:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. – Teratix ₵ 04:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete: Barely found anything about the organization aside from being briefly discussed in a book. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 05:20, 28 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to List of Batman Beyond characters. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Derek Powers

    Derek Powers (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)

    One more comic/animation character with nothing but plot and list of appearances. The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

    WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. The usual dePROD with no helpful rationale, so here we go. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:11, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to List of Batman Beyond characters. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:13, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Inque

    Inque (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)

    Another minor comic/animated character. No reception, pure plot and list of appearances. The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

    WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. The usual dePROD with no helpful rationale, so here we go. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:09, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to List of Batman family enemies. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Lock-Up (comics)

    Lock-Up (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)

    Not a planet, just a very minor character, plot summary, list of appearances, that's it. The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

    WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. The usual dePROD with no helpful rationale, so here we go. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Redirect to List of Batman family enemies. The characters only significance is that he began in animation and then made the transition to regular comics, similarly to Harley Quinn though clearly not as notable. There may be some relevant information out there about that transition, but that could still simply be added to the characters entry on the Batman villain list. Rhino131 (talk) 12:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete or redirect - Fails to establish notability at this time. TTN (talk) 23:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep: I see two pages of coverage in Welcome to Arkham Asylum: Essays on Psychiatry and the Gotham City Institution (McFarland & Co, 2019), as well as The Essential Batman Encyclopedia (Del Rey, 2008) and The DC Comics Encyclopedia (DK Publishing 2016). — Toughpigs (talk) 00:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The actual commentary on the character in the first doesn't really actually say much. It's just 80% plot recap. The "The Essential Batman Encyclopedia" is a literal plot recap, so it does not provide significant coverage. The third doesn't seem to have previews, but it's obviously the same vein of literal encyclopedia like the other. TTN (talk) 00:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Concur. Toughpigs, would you care to provide any quotations from those sources that go beyond a plot recap? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:53, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The coverage in Welcome to Arkham Asylum discusses the character as an example of the messages that the show presents about psychiatric care: "This scene, in particular, conveys another confounding message regarding psychiatric institutions: psychiatric treatment, although therapeutic, can result in fears of both the care provider and the fellow patient." — Toughpigs (talk) 18:09, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The single quoted sentence, which I assume is the best you've found, does not mention the character, and discusses a scene not the character, so it seems totally irrevant.
    WP:NOTINHERITED. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:31, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to Adam Strange. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Rann (fictional planet)

    Rann (fictional planet) (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)

    The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

    WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. The usual dePROD with no helpful rationale, so here we go. Oh yeah, this is another article with zero references, too. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    *Weak keep I was considering redirect, but I an not sure where.

    List of locations of the DC Universe, Adam Strange, and Hawkman are all possibilities. I still don't believe delete is the best option, but if there is no clear redirect target I am left with keep. However I am willing to change based on further discussion and consensus. Rhino131 (talk) 12:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    • Redirect to Adam Strange. While there have been other characters that have had some involvement with the planet, it was introduced with Strange's first appearance and they have more or less had a shared history every since. He is by far the character that is most intrinsically tied to the location. Outside of the single sentence in the introduction mentioning the issue it first appeared in, the entire current article is completely unsourced, in-universe plot descriptions, which should not be kept or merged. Rorshacma (talk) 15:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Redirect to
      WP:ATD-R since there is enough context there for the reader to find info. -2pou (talk) 17:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Delete or redirect as compromise. Does not meet the
      WP:GNG and can possibly be covered in context of something else. Shooterwalker (talk) 03:46, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 04:52, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Transilvane

    Transilvane (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)

    The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

    WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. The usual dePROD with no helpful rationale, so here we go - except this article is also unreferenced, too, not even the usual primary sources used here, nope, nothing... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:06, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 04:52, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanagar

    Thanagar (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)

    The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

    WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. The usual dePROD with no helpful rationale, so here we go. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:05, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Refereeing at international level is not an indication of notability under ny guideline, not seeing anything on the Hungarian Wikipedia article to indicate GNG Fenix down (talk) 06:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Mohd Nazri Abdullah

    Mohd Nazri Abdullah (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 found no significant coverage. Non-notable referee. SL93 (talk) 04:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. Pahiy (talk) 05:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Pahiy (talk) 05:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Pahiy (talk) 05:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:43, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - no evidence he meets GNG. GiantSnowman 18:47, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - zero evidence of notability Spiderone 22:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment This referee has reffed international matches, although GNG is not met here, I was wondering if there are other language sources that haven't been found. Govvy (talk) 11:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I haven't looked closely, but the Hungarian Wikipedia page is surprisingly detailed. Nfitz (talk) 22:57, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    And also unreferenced beyond run-of-the-mill databases! GiantSnowman 18:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep due to working at international matches (and AFC Asian Cup final no less!) --BlameRuiner (talk) 10:08, 2 September 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to Amethyst, Princess of Gemworld. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:38, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Gemworld

    Gemworld (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)

    The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

    WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. The usual dePROD with no helpful rationale, so here we go. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:53, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:53, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 04:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Marvel Comics characters named Iron Man

    List of Marvel Comics characters named Iron Man (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 list seems to fail

    WP:LISTN (not citing any sources outside PRIMARY) and seems like a limited fork of Iron Man (disambiguation). At best I'd suggest ensuring that the linked disambig links to all of the characters mentioned here. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - Rather pointless disambiguation page. Any characters prominently named Iron Man should just be relocated to the real disambiguation page. TTN (talk) 13:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - As stated, any actual notable character here named "Iron Man" would be better to be included on the disambiguation page. But, really, that would only be James Rhodes, as he is the only one here that actually prominently took on the mantle for any amount of time. Every other entry is either just an alternate version of Tony Stark, or "someone who wore the armor once or twice". Rorshacma (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete as redundant to the disambiguation page, and several other Iron Man article spinoffs that are still just about various editions of the same character. Don't need another
      WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 04:03, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was redirect to Walhalla railway line. Tone 04:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Siding, Walhalla line

    Siding, Walhalla line (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)

    A temporary, unnamed railway siding doesn't warrant an article. The sole source is of questionable reliability. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 02:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Merge to Walhalla railway line JarrahTree 10:18, 31 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 04:54, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thomas & Friends annuals

    Thomas & Friends annuals (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:NBOOK. While this isn't named as a list, in function, it is a list. I'm not finding anything that discusses these books as a unit. In fact, I'm pretty much just finding content on wikis, unreliable blogs, and sales sites. I don't see how this is possibly notable. Hog Farm Bacon 02:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 02:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 02:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 02:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 02:11, 27 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 04:54, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Mustafa Majid

    Mustafa Majid (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)

    Appears to be a fringe theorist of ethnic groups in Bangladesh who fails

    WP:NAUTHOR case. Articles in other Wikipedias do not help with sourcing. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 01:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 01:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 01:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 01:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete Fringe theorist lacking the broad coverage we require for such figures.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - zero evidence of notability Spiderone 22:13, 29 August 2020 (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
    talk page or in a deletion review
    ). No further edits should be made to this page.

    The result was delete. Tone 05:06, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    SAGA-EO Project

    SAGA-EO Project (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 defunct project

    fgnievinski (talk) 00:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 01:53, 27 August 2020 (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.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2020_August_27&oldid=979218462"