Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 September 10

Since I've been pinged here I'll avoid !voting but this one clearly lacks in depth coverage to satisfy

Daily News & Analysis coverage was included. DNA itself hardly qualifies as a reliable source along with much of the other outlets of its parent group, due to their track record of both disinformation and undisclosed paid news. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 19:57, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks. I don't think this falls under canvassing — you were pinged due to your participation in the linked threads on Wion News. TrangaBellam (talk) 20:08, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't think so either but AfDs can be a contentious place and some people construe even appropriate notifications as canvassing, so rather I'd avoid that headache. I can't see this one having much chance of surviving anyways regardless of my participation, looking at the dearth of coverage. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 22:04, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Once I got to "The series of 52 thirty-second episodes" in the one source presented, it's obvious this is just cartoon filler meant to be where an ad couldn't be sold and not remembered by many. There are links to episodes here, which is just 'guy tries to get off deserted island in 30 seconds, fails'×52.
  chatter) 04:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete On the Hungarian wiki, one-sentence "articles" (and I use that term loosely) like this would've been speedy deleted on the ground of "test" or "not an article". Merely announcing that something existed is not a Wikipedia article. Also, beware that searching is incredibly difficult due to the simple "name". Even with "w teletoon" I only found a PR article. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 19:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I couldn't find sufficient sources to show notability. Suonii180 (talk) 10:12, 17 September 2021 (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. ✗plicit 23:57, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zmanda Recovery Manager

Zmanda Recovery Manager (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Doesn't meet

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:30, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete fails WP:GNG. A mere 2 gnews hits, one being a press release. LibStar (talk) 04:37, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or at best merge into
  Zmanda Cloud Backup for that matter. Or maybe merge all four into Amanda (software) also I see single-purpose account Special:Contributions/Nikunj_wiki shows indications of a possible conflict of interest, in a burst of edits circa 2011. W Nowicki (talk) 20:26, 15 September 2021 (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. – Joe (talk) 08:26, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sansy, Turkmenistan

Sansy, Turkmenistan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

The village does not exist, the creator has just been blocked indef for creating articles on mostly fictitious references with untelated references. Ymblanter (talk) 17:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkmenistan-related deletion discussions. Ymblanter (talk) 17:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:05, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nomination.TH1980 (talk) 01:04, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The sources are bogus, I can't find any mentions of it elsewhere, and searching it on Google Maps simply shows a pin in the middle of nowhere. Aerin17 (t • c) 03:41, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Aerin17: Check out the US Army May Service topographic map NJ 40-3 Modar at those coordinates and you will find Sansyya, an alternate name for Sansy. --Bejnar (talk) 23:06, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Okay, I take back the comment about it not existing-- but simply because a settlement can be found on a couple of maps/lists does not mean that it is notable enough for a Wikipedia page. It doesn't particularly meet

  WP:GEOLAND, given that it doesn't seem to be a populated, legally recognized place, and there is no other coverage of it to be found. What would the page even be? There's potentially something at these coordinates but we know nothing about it? Aerin17 (t • c) 00:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  @Aerin17: Re: "legally recognized place" see, for example, listing here in the 1976 print version U.S.S.R.: Official Standard Names Approved by the United States, which also shows it as a populated place. In Russian it is Санси, and is listed as a rural settlement. --Bejnar (talk) 00:54, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I am making a very skeptical face through my computer screen. I will freely admit that I don't have much experience with GEOLAND to know whether being in this book/database technically counts as making it a legally recognized place. If that means it meets the letter of the guideline, sure, fine. But I feel like it's a stretch. Even the guideline has some flexibility, given the use of the word "typically." Given that literally no other sources can be found beyond notes/maps/databases that show nothing more than its existence (yes, I saw the ones in your comment below), I still do not believe that Sansy is notable. Aerin17 (t • c) 01:33, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the coordinates are confirmed here, it is a settlement in the Karakum Desert. Alternate names are "Sansyya" and "Sansyz". The settlement at Kirpili (Kirpichli) is 13.5 nautical miles east of Sansy. It is shown on the US Army May Service topographic map NJ 40-3 Modar as "Sansyya" copy here. Kirpichli is shown on the same map. Sansy is listed in the GNS database, with its alternative names. Listed here in the 1976 print version U.S.S.R.: Official Standard Names Approved by the United States. --Bejnar (talk) 03:33, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Geonames is a notoriously bad source. That something is there may mean that (i) the settlement exist (ii) something exists there, but it is not a settlement, for example, a geological party location or a small military installation; (iii) it existed there but is no longer there; (iv) it is a mistake, for example, the settlement has been renamed and has other coordinates. The fact that OSM and Google Maps (including Google panoramas) shows nothing is a strong indication that we are dealing with (iii) or (iv). That the coordiates are the same is not surprising since the creator of the article obviously copied them from Geonames.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ymblanter: Those things are not true of the US Army May Service topographic map NJ 40-3 Modar which clearly shows "Sansyya" copy here. --Bejnar (talk) 23:01, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I see the name on the map, but I do not see any evidence that this is a settlement. It could be a single house for example--Ymblanter (talk) 05:44, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - This used to be a settlement — I doubt Sov-mil. but cannot confirm in less than a week. I do not think that the subject has any chance of meeting GNG. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Doesn't seem notable per above. Qwerfjkltalk 14:41, 18 September 2021 (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 Goodman Group#Goodman UK. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:30, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Goodman UK

Goodman UK (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD

)

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

Doesn't meet

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/redirect to
  Goodman UK per my comment in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leeds Valley Park (2nd nomination). It would be due weight to merge some of the material in this article to Goodman Group, which I have done. Cunard (talk) 00:44, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Merge any relevant information to Goodman Group#Goodman Group UK. I couldn't find sufficient evidence that the topic merits it's own article and Goodman Group already has a subsection it can be merged into. Suonii180 (talk) 10:16, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Smitty Werben 04:08, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Smitty Werben 04:08, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

• Comment Wouldn't the mention of Erfworld, and Balder as the writer of Erfworld, in this citation https://web.archive.org/web/20071212161244/http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/top10/article/0,30583,1686204_1686244_1692143,00.html meet the basic criteria for notability? There are other articles about Erfworld by other sources, like https://www.wired.com/2010/01/erfworld-geekiest-comic-ever/ and https://www.cnn.com/2011/10/07/living/web-comic-spotlight-erfworlds-rob-balder/index.html as well. In the previous proposal for deletion there were comments along those lines. YourBestFriendFromMySpace (talk) 23:36, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment As the author himself has worked to remove the series from the internet, Erfworld's status as a "significant or well-known work" is questionable. The scant support of multiple independent reviews or articles is highlighted by the post above.Interjectcite84 (talk) 02:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The first book made a splash and was commented on by writers with Time and NPR. Balder withdrawing from interaction with the internet and closing his fan community isn't the same thing as the work being removed from the internet. The books were published and remain in print. Balder took the first book off Giant in the Playground's website, but the whole work is still available on the archive on Balder's site. Balder is not generally famous, but he made a work that was noteworthy at the time of publication. His handling of the IP, most particularly the cryptocurrency funding attempt, was also noteworthy simply because as near as I can tell it was the first time anyone had tried to do that with a graphic novel or web comic. Regardless of Balder's personal wishes about wanting to disappear into obscurity, he's achieved a measure of notability through that authorship and his handling of the Erfworld IP which will outlive him. YourBestFriendFromMySpace (talk) 05:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Erfworld as a series seems to have gained notoriety through its association with Rich Burlew and Giant in the Playground. Its removal from that site and seclusion to a static archive that is not prominently featured on its own site's landing page reduces its cultural significance. As far as I can tell the books are not in print and were self-published. That the comic generated a couple minor articles on the internet a decade ago does not make it notable. The author is also not notable for having used print-on-demand services to sell his work to fans or his attempt to use his fans to mine cryptocurrency. The existence of a few die-hard fans of a discontinued webcomic does not necessitate an encyclopedia article for its author. Interjectcite84 (talk) 14:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Both
  single-purpose accounts. The former has only made edits relevant to this AfD, while the latter has only edited at the AfD and the related Erfworld article. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:14, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment I've had wikipedia accounts in the past and made a handful of edits, but it's been years. I've also made some unsigned edits here and there, but you can't participate in an AfD conversation without creating an account, so yes, I created an account to participate in this discussion. I don't believe that invalidates my comments. Interjectcite84 (talk) 13:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm confused by what you're saying. First of all, unsigned edits are still recorded in your edit history, so that doesn't make any difference to my previous point. If you mean that you sometimes edit while logged out, be careful that you're not violating
    sockpuppetry violations. You are correct that single-purpose accounts can contribute to AfDs, but those accounts are often used as sockpuppets, which is why it's important to at least tag them when they appear. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:35, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Thanks for letting me know. I maintained an account over a decade ago and don't know what email address I used back then, but I'll review
    WP:CLEANSTART. I have never edited any Erfworld or Erfworld-related pages. I have made minor grammatical edits in the intervening time, but have not edited logged out since creating this account.Interjectcite84 (talk) 20:42, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

• Keep. I'm going to ignore the odd conversation above, and stick to evaluating the subject based on notability policy. Seems to meet criteria 3 of
  WP:CREATIVE per the sources given above. That was the consensus at the last AFD. Notability is not temporary, so later changes in the availability of the work online don't matter. 4meter4 (talk) 02:27, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep: Looks notable to me. — Qwerfjkltalk 14:46, 18 September 2021 (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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:31, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kuzma, Croatia

Kuzma, Croatia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Not notable. Uninhabited. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Croatia-related deletion discussions. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep. It's a ghost town, there are thousands of them on Wikipedia. This place likely was notable at once, especially since it had nearly 300 people at its peak population. In this same logic, we would be deleting articles for defunct companies, discontinued products, or deceased people. Waddles 🗩 🖉 15:36, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep mundane gazetteer entry per
  WP:5P1. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:48, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:08, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Appears to pass
  WP:GEOLAND as a formerly recognised settlement. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:24, 15 September 2021 (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 20:32, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Togo, Democratic Republic of the Congo

Togo, Democratic Republic of the Congo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

The first citation is a random Excel spreadsheet that does not mention this Togo, and the second is "How a Finnish Symphony Orchestra Collaborates with South Indian Carnatic Musicians". User:Spokane Ball yt, can you please explain this. This being the name of a country I cannot find sources about this supposed town, nor are coordinates provided. Reywas92^Talk 13:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 13:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Democratic Republic of the Congo-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 13:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Certainly appears to be a settlement on Google Maps. But anything else hard to find. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:37, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• WP:TNT] delete - Maybe it's real; maybe it's not; current state is junk because of the fake referencing. No objection to recreation with real referencing. Hog Farm _Talk 20:34, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete, per Hog Farm. It may well be real place (this part of the country is extremely remote) but I agree there's nothing to establish notability or salvage the current content. —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:58, 11 September 2021 (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. – Joe (talk) 08:29, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Modar, Turkmenistan

Modar, Turkmenistan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

The Google Maps pin is near a facility of some sort but I don't see a town. I cannot find any results calling this a town or otherwise notable place. The first citation is about opera of Turkmenistan?! User:Spokane Ball yt, why was that a useful link? Reywas92^Talk 13:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 13:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkmenistan-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 13:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• There is absolutely no such town in Turkmenistan. Needs to be deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:35, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is just a locale, not a town. The user who created this has created many more similar articles for non-existent towns and using irrelevant references. They do have a current discussion at ANI regarding this. Someone proposed deleting all of their articles, however there is at least one that I know of (Zumwalt, Washington) that is a legitimate community. Waddles 🗩 🖉 15:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - NJ 40-3 (AMS) documents Modar to be a ruined town. I will try to ascertain its current state; had probably heard of its name in a list of untapped petroleum/energy deposits in Turkmenistan. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:50, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per § Sansy, Turkmenistan above. Qwerfjkltalk 14:53, 18 September 2021 (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 13:24, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Our Lady of Guadalupe Church (Danbury, Connecticut)

Our Lady of Guadalupe Church (Danbury, Connecticut) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Like Notre Dame Church (Easton, Connecticut), since deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Notre Dame Church (Easton, Connecticut), this church was mentioned but not discussed in a mega AfD that closed as keep, logistically. A BEFORE for this particular church shows no evidence of notability with coverage limited to event listings and nothing that would meet ORG. Not mentioned in the city nor in the diocese, so a redirect wouldn't be helpful or DUE given lack of other churches' presence. Star Mississippi 13:23, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 13:23, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 13:23, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 13:23, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I couldn't find anything towards
  WP:GNG, only directories, not independent stuff, and media coverage about sexual abuse by one the church's former priests (which is not in-depth coverage about the church itself). - Tristan Surtel (talk) 14:18, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per Tristan - no evidence of notability. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There's some evidence of notability, owing to detailed coverage from multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. —
  talk) 05:53, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Those articles are definitely not significant coverage about the church as GNG requires. The first few are about sexual abuse by a former priest (the only thing those articles tell about the church is that it is located on "Golden Hill Road in Danbury" and that the Rev. Jaime Marin-Cardona has been a priest there), so nothing in-depth about the church there, and in the last two articles the church is only mentioned in a single sentence as one of a number of examples of churches with increasing attendance. - Tristan Surtel (talk) 08:04, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Danbury, Connecticut or Delete, in that order of preference. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or merge -- There is nothing in the article to show that this is not a NN local church. Mikehawk's list of references in the local press establish its existence but not its notability. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, I couldn't find sufficient evidence of notability. I don't think it should be merged as the information isn't referenced. Suonii180 (talk) 13:09, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails
  WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 02:35, 18 September 2021 (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. Rewrite can occur outside of AfD Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:33, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene Thuraisingam

Eugene Thuraisingam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Does not meet

It also does not help that there are some severe conflict of interest violations going on in this article by its creator, a single purpose account. The article was initially already rejected at articles for creation for failing WP:GNG, but they ignored it anyway and decided to create it themselves exactly a year later after making a few edits to reach the edit count.

It also involves constant additions of puffery, copyvio images and subsequently removing COI tags in response. The very first reference literally goes to their website. There is also another single purpose account, which could possibly also hint at sockpuppetry. Otterslort (talk) 13:22, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep – this article is a mess, and I agree with the nominator that the vast majority of the 79 (!) references are probably worthless for notability purposes. Nonetheless, I find it difficult to discount sources like [3] [4] [5], all of which come from reliable Singaporean press outlets and seem to give Thuraisingam substantial coverage as opposed to trivial mentions. That's probably enough to meet the
  deletion is not cleanup, although the article is sorely in need of it. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:36, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Leaning keep as there exists significant coverage in reliable secondary sources (e.g. TNP, Today, Straits Times). There should still be enough information for an article after pruning the passing mentions and primary sources, but I'm not opposed to a
  WP:TNT considering the suspicions of conflict-of-interest editing and sockpuppetry. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:23, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak keep per Extraordinary Writ and KN2731 but needs a rewrite.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:59, 17 September 2021 (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. ✗plicit 13:47, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hadjer Sini, Chad

Hadjer Sini, Chad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

The coordinates given here show an empty stretch of the Sahara Desert. Citation 1 is about places n France. Citation 2 which I do have access to is about the music of Chad and does not include this name at all, neither the supposed town nor the mentioned mountain. User:Spokane Ball yt can you please explain this? Reywas92^Talk 13:03, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 13:03, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 13:03, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:TNT delete - maybe it's real; maybe it's not, page creator has been indeffed for use of fake referencing. As this article is cited only to those fake references, it should just be presumptively deleted with no prejudice against recreating with real referencing. Hog Farm _Talk 18:53, 11 September 2021 (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. ✗plicit 13:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Bonello

Tony Bonello (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Fails

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete He has no top tier fights so he fails to meet
  WP:GNG. I checked ibbjf.com for his world championships results. His three silver medals all came in age limited divisions that had only two competitors. It turns he lost to three different fighters in his only matches. Merely showing up does not indicate notability. Papaursa (talk) 20:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per nom. No Great Shaker (talk) 04:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails
  WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:03, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete At least GNG is not met Yaxı Hökmdarz (talk) 05:29, 17 September 2021 (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.

International Environment Photographers Association

International Environment Photographers Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Doesn't seem to meet

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Smitty Werben 14:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Smitty Werben 14:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Smitty Werben 14:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

• Comment. The association closed in 2017. https://web.archive.org/web/20190125170823/http://www.theiepa.org/news/171215/article01.php Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Lack of sources. Lagoyan (talk) 16:45, 15 September 2021 (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.

Susie Tallman

Susie Tallman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Not finding any worthwhile reviews or significant coverage in the article or online. Edwardx (talk) 21:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I found this review and some references in books. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:19, 10 September 2021 (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 Comic Valkyrie. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:00, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kill Time Communication

Kill Time Communication (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD

)

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

Last AfD attracted little input. I may be missing Japanese sources, but I can see mentions but not enough to show it is notable. Has been in

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:32, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:32, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:19, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:20, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:20, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:20, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Comic Valkyrie since it is their only notable publication. I looked for sources but wasn't able to find much outside of press releases. Link20XX (talk) 14:34, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Comic Valkyrie.4meter4 (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2021 (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. – Joe (talk) 08:31, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Women to the Top

Women to the Top (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

A short-lived European project for a few countries that does not seem to have any encyclopedic value. Question mark over notability for over 10 years suggests this doesn't pass

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - it seems to pass GNG with the sources it already has (significant coverage from two major newspapers and evaluations from the Nordic Gender Institute and University of Gothenburg) and a very quick search for Swedish-language sources returns at least this and this which could maybe be added. And, so far, the article pretty much only seems to have Swedish and English sources - there'd probably be even more coverage in Estonian, Danish, and Greek-language sources. NHCLS (talk) 09:57, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

--RamotHacker (talk) 18:45, 4 September 2021 (UTC)*Delete Simply not notable at all.[reply]

• Keep per
  WP:SIGCOV based on the sources already in the article.4meter4 (talk) 18:41, 18 September 2021 (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. – Joe (talk) 08:31, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Arnold

Laura Arnold (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Notability of this BLP is largely inherited from Arnold Ventures LLC. MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:16, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:01, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:28, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Most of the references are to her (or to her and her husband collectively), rather than to the company. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:29, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Her wealth may have come from Arnold Ventures but what she has done with it has made her notable. There seems to be significant coverage of her in independent reliable sources. RicDod (talk) 17:28, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep. Passes
  John and Laura Arnold (currently a Redirect). Given that their philanthropy and business are run as a team, it really doesn't make sense to split them into individual articles. But that should probably be discussed through a merge proposal not at AFD.4meter4 (talk) 18:52, 18 September 2021 (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. ✗plicit 13:45, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Srayra

Srayra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

I cannot find any sources about this place, or where it is located. It is not in localiban; http://www.localiban.org/jezzine-district Huldra (talk) 21:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. Huldra (talk) 21:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the ar.wiki article names the village as “Soueira” not “Srayra” but I can’t find any sources for that either. Mccapra (talk) 22:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:42, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nobody has come up with anything. Mccapra (talk) 11:42, 10 September 2021 (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. – Joe (talk) 08:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Umantewena

Umantewena (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

No significant coverage that would meet GNG as required by criteria #2 of

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 21:55, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:41, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete : not existing settlement.--Arorae (talk) 15:04, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Was it a settlement previously? Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:55, 15 September 2021 (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.

Kamvas Studio 22

Kamvas Studio 22 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Fails

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 05:58, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 14:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete just a product spec sheet, the kind of thing that gets obsolete very fast anyway. Article on its company
  Huion is thin, but could mention maybe one sentence on it. Would support a merge too ,but lean to just delete. W Nowicki (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2021 (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. – Joe (talk) 08:35, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hockey Canada Officiating Program

Hockey Canada Officiating Program (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

The Hockey Canada Officiating Program appears to fails

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Smitty Werben 04:13, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Smitty Werben 04:13, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

Smitty Werben 04:13, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

• Hockey Canada is a publically funded organization and receives its authority delegated through Sport Canada. Certifications are governed by Hockey Canada, in a similar way to the PMP designation is governed by the Project Management Institute. Both are internationally recognized certifications. Perhaps it's better to rebrand the article as "officiating hockey" with a section dedicated to the certification process. however it can be expected that the Hockey Canada website would be the only source available as validation for the certification. jordanleblanc (talk) 03:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Putting a new name on the article does not resolve the sourcing concerns. The information in the article is available only from
  WP:NOT. Flibirigit (talk) 19:02, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak keep. I did find two quality sources with some in depth coverage; one a peer reviewed journal article on the retention of ice hockey officials in Canada, and the other a magazine article about a journalist's experience going through the organization's training as a rookie referee. I don't have access to major Canadian newspapers, but I would imagine that the organization has coverage given its importance to ice hockey in Canada. See sources below. Also, the organization was originally named the Canadian Hockey Officiating Program according to one of those articles, so sources may exist under that name.4meter4 (talk) 19:09, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Fowler, Brian, Jimmy Smith, Heidi Nordstrom, and Tyler Ferguson. "Ice Hockey Officiating Retention: A Qualitative Understanding of Junior Ice Hockey Officials' Motivations in Canada." Managing Sport and Leisure 24, no. 1-3 (2019): 18-31.
• Rosenberg, Elmer. "TWO MINUTES FOR FLAILING: As a Rookie Referee--at 52--I Soon Learned There's Nowhere to Hide." Maclean's (Toronto) 116, no. 41 (2003): 63.

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:59, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Saviano

Jeff Saviano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

Clearly fails

• Keep Passes
  WP:BASIC subject is covered in many reliable sources including TaxHistory, NYTimes, Reuters, Bloomberg, AccountingToday, TEDx talk,BizJournals and many others. Riteboke (talk) 10:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify and decline. No in-depth coverage of the person at all. Doesn't satisfy
  WP:ANYBIO
  . Below is my assessment of the current sources in the article.

—Scottyoak2 (talk) 16:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. While there are glancing mentions of him in several articles on tax policy and similar, I don't think it adds up to
  WP:NAUTHOR. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 16:25, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete. Almost nothing in GS, so not much impact. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:44, 13 September 2021 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete per the source analysis above. Fails
  WP:ANYBIO. I will add by saying that I have a subscription access to The New York Times, and the subject is only briefly quoted in the article. The article is not about him, and we don't count mere quotes as indications of notability or as significant coverage.4meter4 (talk) 19:23, 18 September 2021 (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.

Bandar Country Homes

Bandar Country Homes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)

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

does not satisfy

• Delete I can’t find any RIS. Mccapra (talk) 11:57, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 15:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 15:13, 10 September 2021 (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.