Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 16

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
< June 15 June 17 >

Purge server cache

Leneve Damens

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

Redirect to

WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 23:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Cary Brown

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

This article fails the

WP:COI editing and no changes or improvements to the article have been made since the COI tag was placed on the article. Go4thProsper (talk) 21:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

2024 South African provincial elections

2024 South African provincial elections (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No reason for this article to exist. User was

BOLD in creating it, but there are individual articles for the provincial elections, and the results summary (which is all it is) belongs on the main page, where it was cut from. It also does not attribute the source article. Greenman (talk) 10:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete per nom. This should really just be on the main article. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 12:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as the primary article is already very large, and it should remain mostly focused on the national parliamentary election. I propose keeping this article, and removing all the repeating content from the primary one.
If length is an issue, there are better things to remove from the main article than the results summary. That page cannot display endless opinion polls, various trivia in the leadup etc., but not display the results :) Greenman (talk) 13:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MapperGuy87 (talk) 20:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — The original article is very long and a page for subdivisional elections is common for systems like this. This page could be more in-depth but it makes far more sense to put a shorter summary (probably in a table form) on the "general election" page and keep the in-depth stuff here. Watercheetah99 (talk) 01:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you've assessed the situation correctly. There are already in-depth (or what can become in-depth) pages for each individual provincial election. This intermediate page serves no purpose. The summary that it currently contains should be on the main page, and in-depth coverage should be on the individual pages. Greenman (talk) 13:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No I'm aware, this is just a common element of approaches to similar systems. There are intermediate pages to link elections on the same subdivision level; for example: despite the fact that pretty much every locality's elections had a specific page, the 2024 United Kingdom local elections article exists and helps link the elections. An even better example are pages like 2022 United States gubernatorial elections or 2023 Nigerian gubernatorial elections, these intermediate pages are common and serve a purpose. If we wanted to completely overhaul the 2024 South African election pages, these examples could be models: there'd be an overview page ("2024 South African elections" based on 2024 United States elections) with a tables and short summaries on national, provincial, and local (by-) elections; there'd be separate 2024 South African general election and 2024 South African provincial elections pages; and there'd be pages for each provincial election. This would shorten each article and avoid the current overlap of each page. Those are just my suggestions and probably too much work, but I'm still a Keep for this discussion. Watercheetah99 (talk) 04:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Seems reasonable to have a summary article that keeps all the provincial election results in one place and links out to more detailed articles. As Watercheetah says, this is fairly standard practice (e.g. 2023 Italian regional elections). Number 57 21:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Memadangu

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

Can't find anything but postal directories about this village — not even its coordinates. Unsourced since creation in 2011. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep
WP:GEOLAND - is a census designated place, has a post office, has government recognition. BrigadierG (talk) 21:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is a delete until the failure of
    WP:PERX. Google Maps redirects Memadangu to Mekkadambu, but that is southwest of Muvattupuzha, not southeast. Geschichte (talk) 09:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Doreen Kyazze

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

I reviewed tis article thrice to determine whether it is considered worthy of a Wikipedia entry. Firstly, I saw there were good sources as though a reviewer will do. I now checked the sources and almost a good percentage weren't reliable per

WP:SIRS
definitely defined this type of article.

In second checking for confirmation, I discovered so many sources lined her perhaps a single line other quote while addressing her as a worker at Penal. I would have said this should be redirected to the organisation page but didn't see any advocacy worthy enough for

WP:ANYBIO since it was once nominated and wasn't won (it's is also a lesser award, thus not major like ANYBIO. I've therefore brought this to the table proper discussion. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 19:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A review of newly found sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Selective TV, Inc.

AfDs for this article:
Selective TV, Inc. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject lacks the necessary coverage to meet the

WP:NCORP. A 2010 AfD closed as no consensus but notability thresholds have changed significantly in the past 14 years. Let'srun (talk) 21:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Kirk Lynn

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

This subject appears to fail

WP:NAUTHOR. JFHJr (㊟) 22:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep here, but a weak one, following some rework. I've added some sources and reworked the article. I think there is a narrow claim to notability, his first book seems to have received a fair amount of coverage in some reliable sources (and been made into a film, unfortunately most of the coverage of that seems to be focused on the actor, not the film, so I've left that out), as well as some of his play work. Others may disagree, but I think he's just over the line. Mdann52 (talk) 12:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak-ish delete I think it's close but not quite GNG. He has written one book that was reviewed in major local newspapers. He has written and adapted plays in that same locality. In 2020 his book was adapted to the film as a short. (I don't find much about it at IMDB) That's about it. At this point I think he is a fish in a pond, but not beyond it. Lamona (talk) 04:32, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Masake

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

An article that doesn't meet

WP:CREATIVE. While the notability of Chapter Four Uganda is questioned, I simply may conclude redirecting there per this source. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 19:29, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heer Da Hero

Heer Da Hero (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't find much about this drama in RS except for some ROTM coverage like this in DAWN and coverage like this in Daily Times, which is churnalism and also falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. We need solid coverage to prove GNG, not just trivial mentions or ROTM coverage. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Amar_Khan#As_writer: Coverage including some that contains critical assessment is imv enough to keep this but to avoid long discussions that have taken place during other Afds of Pakistani-related films/actors/series etc, I am suggesting this as alternative to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep meets
    WP:GNG. Coverage in Daily Times ([8]) and Dawn ([9]) is enough. Both are staff written articles. 188.29.129.61 (talk) 19:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • 188.29.129.61, I did include both of these coverage in my nomination, and I explained why they weren't sufficient to pass the GNG . —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Thank you for presenting those sources and commenting. For the record, the article in Dawn, signed by Sadaf Haider, and that contains three paragraphs on the series, including critical appraisal, does not seem churnalism nor to "fall under NEWSORGINDIA"; it contains more than trivial mentions or "ROTM": "This script was written by the lead actress Amar Khan and was initially called JanjalPur. After the teasers, many complained this show might be too loud and filmi for Ramazan, but a strong cast and direction pulls the story together, keeping it entertaining without going over the edge.Imran Ashraf is perfect in the familiar avatar of the action hero, beating up goondas (goons) and maintaining peace in the neighbourhood where his father (Waseem Abbas) lost an election. This year ‘Hero Butt’ will ensure his father wins the seat of the local councillor. The opposition is TikTok star Heer Jatt’s family, her father played by Kashif Abbasi and uncle, a corrupt policeman played by Afzal Khan (Jan Rambo), whose deadpan humour is unmissable.Like most Ramazan shows, the supporting cast of quirky but lovable personalities are essential to the spirit of the show. Amar is fantastic as Heer, funny, tough, determined and somehow vulnerable too. The show also debuts Scottish Pakistani YouTube star Rahim Pardesi (Mohammad Amer) whose hilarious face-off with Hero Butt is the stuff of legend. Despite the simple setting, efforts have been made to keep up the production values, and the wardrobe and lighting giving us a very watchable show..-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I didn't refer to the coverage in Dawn as churnalism or even classified it under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The coverage was in Daily Times, and Dawn's coverage alone is insufficient to meet WP:GNG. Saqib (talk) 10:50, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Ah, OK! Thanks for clarifying. Still, I don't think you can call it "ROTM" (which you do, unless I misunderstood that part too). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Mushy Yank, But GNG require strong sourcing, something which are unlikely to be challenged or questioned, IMO. — Saqib (talk) 20:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:27, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Daily Times article is clearly marked as "Staff Report", so it is reliable - it is not a web desk report. 2A01:E0A:C39:5CB0:AC70:C0B4:482D:B6E8 (talk) 22:32, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • IP -
      WP:RSNOI clearly states even legitimate Indian (as well Pakistani) news organizations intermingle regular news with sponsored content and press release–based write-ups, often with inadequate or no disclosure. Paid news is a highly pervasive and deeply integrated practice within Indian (as well Pakistani) news media so requires extra vigilance. And Daily Times is known for publishing CHURNALISM styled articles as evident in the PROMO tone used. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 22:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]

information Note: This page was created by 182.182.100.177 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and edited by 39.34.171.59 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and Avadh990 -- all blocked for UPE sock farming.Saqib (talk I contribs) 22:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of deadliest Storm Prediction Center days by outlook risk level

List of deadliest Storm Prediction Center days by outlook risk level (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails

WP:LISTCRIT due to lack of an unambiguous criterion for including data points. Jasper Deng (talk) 21:26, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

2019 FIFA Women's World Cup broadcasting rights

2019 FIFA Women's World Cup broadcasting rights (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Just another case of

WP:PRIMARY and announcments, not helping this list to assert notability. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

1905 (film)

1905 (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This film was canceled before it even began filming (like happens to many other films). This article does not meet the threshold for notability stated in

WP:NFF. Gonnym (talk) 13:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 15:11, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The failure of the production received a lot of significant coverage from reliable independent media. A redirect to the article about the director should be considered anyway. Absolutely opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC) (added 4 sources, there are more).[reply]
    You mean that it received the same one paragraph about the production being canceled because the company being bankrupt. All valid information on the non-exiting Prenom H article or as you say, a one line mention on Kiyoshi Kurosawa's page (which it already is). Gonnym (talk) 16:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not sure I understand your comment. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:35, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selective merge into the page for either Kiyoshi Kurosawa or Tony Leung Chiu-wai. It looks like there was a short flurry of coverage about the film and its cancellation, but I don't see where there's been any true long-term coverage about this. The best I could find was this, which only gave it kind of a brief mention. The thing with cancelled productions is that the guidelines is looking for quite a lot of coverage. Even the infamous Superman Lives wasn't deemed to be notable enough for its own article. I think this could be covered in a few sentences on either Kurosawa or Leung's articles at most. Perhaps an "impact" section at Senkaku Islands dispute, if doable? ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A decent example of what an article about notable cancelled film would look like sources-wise would be Akira (planned film). That's a cancelled film that's been kicking around for decades and still gets some coverage now and again, despite it being in near permanent development hell. It also survived two AfDs, although I'll note that the last one was divided on whether or not it should have its own article. Something like this film, where there's more or less just a handful of coverage, just isn't enough. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Fails GNG, NFILM, nothing in article or found in BEFORE meets WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth, keep votes provide no sources or guidelines to eval. Ping me if sources are found.  // Timothy :: talk  15:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I added FOUR sources addressing the production and I am not sure how one could consider them unreliable nor insignificant.
  1. Japan Today in an article titled "Atsuko Maeda's film canceled after studio goes bust due to Senkaku dispute" stated, Shooting of the film "1905," starring former AKB48 member Atsuko Maeda has been canceled after its production and distribution company filed for bankruptcy, it has been revealed.The period movie was set to star Chinese actor Tony Leung Chiu Wai, 50, Japanese actor Shota Matsuda, 27, and Maeda, 21, who was making her first movie since she "graduated" from AKB48 last summer. It was to be directed by famed horror director Kiyoshi Kurosawa.According to a Sports Nippon report, movie production and distribution house Prenom-H Co filed for bankruptcy after shooting costs rocketed. The added costs were said to be incurred as a result of the Senkaku island dispute between Japan and China. The movie was a Japan-China joint production, with 90% of the movie's dialogue spoken in Chinese dialects.Credit research company Teikoku Databank Ltd said that Prenom-H Co has received authorization to start bankruptcy proceedings from the Tokyo District Court. Prenom-H is believed to have liabilities amounting to around 643 million yen.The large-scale action production was centered around Yokohama in 1905. Filming was scheduled for both Japan and Taiwan and the movie was pencilled for release in Japan this fall.
  2. The Hollywood Reporter in an article whose subheading is "The Japanese shingle has filed for bankruptcy amid debt related to action film "1905," which actor Tony Leung pulled out of due to the territorial spat." wrote, Distributor Prenom-H began bankruptcy proceedings in the Tokyo District Court with debts of $7 million (643 million yen) on Feb. 21, following the problems with filmmaker Kiyoshi Kurosawa‘s 1905. The project ran into trouble after Hong Kong star Tony Leungpulled out of the production last September, at the height of the China-Japan row over the Senkaku-Diayou Islands.Leung had been criticized in China for appearing in the film, which was set in Yokohama, Japan, in the year of the title, but had been scheduled to shoot in Taiwan. Financing for the Japan-China co-production was also reportedly disrupted by the political tensions between the two countries, leaving the project in limbo.
  3. Variety in an article whose subheading is "Production delays on '1905' tips distrib over edge" wrote, Production difficulties on Japan-Hong Kong period actioner “1905,” which had been tipped for a major fest bow, has hastened the demise of its Japanese distrib Prenom H. The ongoing dispute between Japan and China over the Senkaku Islands, which touched off massive protests in China last year, has stalled the pic’s shoot, which started in November. Star Tony Leung has reportedly bailed on the project, pushing back the release and putting a crimp on financing. Starring Shota Matsuda and Atsuko Maeda, and helmed by Kiyoshi Kurosawa, the pic was set to bow in Japan in October, with Prenom H and Shochiku co-distribbing.
  4. The Guardian in an article about the effect of the Senkaku dispute on film wrote, The big budget Sino-Japanese co-production 1905 also appears to be another victim of the ongoing dispute over the islands. Starring Hong Kong's Tony Leung, and directed by Japan's Kiyoshi Kurosawa, the period action-drama was due to start filming in Taiwan in November but has now been postponed. Leung was due to play a loan shark who ventures from Guangdong province in China to Yokohama in Japan to recover debts from a band of anti-Manchu government revolutionaries.
Feel free to also open and read the existing sources on the page, and to check the other existing sources covering the production and its notable failure.
For example, a ONE-CLICK search gives, among other things:
  1. https://www.indiewire.com/news/general-news/tony-leung-and-j-horror-master-kiyoshi-kurosawa-team-for-upcoming-japanese-chinese-period-drama-1905-106255/
  2. https://news.yahoo.com/news/style/tony-leung-1905-indefinitely-161527817.html
  3. https://variety.com/2012/film/news/tony-leung-to-star-in-1905-1118059020/
  4. https://www.chicagotribune.com/2012/09/10/tony-leung-to-star-in-1905-hk-thesp-has-first-lead-role-in-a-japanese-pic/
Plenty of other articles about 1905 exist.
Oh, and of course, the "guideline to eval" should be
WP:GNG ("A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"), if that is really the issue in the keep vote(s) (there's only mine) mentioned in the one delete !vote above. .-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Articles about the studio or their financial problems are not articles about the film, none of the above as SIGCOV about the film, they are passing mentions of the film while addressing other subjects. SIGCOV requires direct and indepth coverage of the subject - the film. None of the sources above meets this requirement. Disputes and problems are common and derail productions all the time, there is not indication the ones that impacted this are anything notable that merits an article.  // Timothy :: talk  17:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just read the titles of the articles or their subheadings, then read them, thank you. Stating that they are not "SIGCOV" and only contain "passing mentions" of the film is not accurate, I am sorry. The rest of your reply is contradictory, sorry again. Disputes and problems are common and derail productions all the time, there is not indication the ones that impacted this are anything notable that merits an article....hhm, yes, there is an indication and it's precisely the coverage addressing the failure of the production directly and in depth in numerous (again, more exist, as I am sure your BEFORE has shown you) articles in very reliable media. I have no further comment. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:41, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:43, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing ReaderofthePack's comment first,
Tony Leung, and Atsuko Maeda were all leadings figures in the film, so it is unreasonable to merge the article into any one of them while neglecting the others. The examples raised, Superman Lives and Akira (planned film), are not comparable in this case. Superman Lives was only in the early stages of development, not even with a confirmed leading cast. Akira is not exactly a cancelled film, but rather stuck in development hell and production waiting to resume due to Waititi's current commitments. A recent example with a more similar context that comes to my mind is Scoob! Holiday Haunt
, which also underwent pre-production but was scrapped partially due to the production company's financial issues. Scoob! Holiday Haunt still has its article retained.
Addressing Timothy's claims, I was puzzled by your statement that "articles about the studio or their financial problems are not articles about the film" and calling the above sources "passing mentions of the film". I agree with
Variety sources (published in 2012) announced the film's release and provided in-depth coverage of the plot, cast, crew, and development process. Meanwhile, The Japan Times, The Guardian, and Yahoo! News (Cinema Online) sources focused on the film sparking political controversies related to the Senkaku Islands dispute
and Tony Leung being labeled a traitor by the Chinese. These five sources have nothing to do with the cancellation of the film, while they are all sufficient to establish the film's notability.
In addition to the subjects discussed, I have found numerous related Chinese and Japanese sources. There are sources with in-depth coverage of Tony Leung, Atsuko Maeda, and Shota Matsuda's characters (see
Golden Horse Film Festival in 2016, he was asked about 1905 in interviews and expressed the possibility of continuing the film (see Sina[17] and Liberty Times[18]). Maeda also made comments on the project in 2016 and expressed interest in reprising her role (See Natalie[19]
). The language of the sources should not affect its reliability, in fact, it may even be better than English sources in this case, as the film is a Mandarin-language Japanese production.
Let's review what we have at the moment. We have in-depth coverage of the film's early development, its announcement, pre-production details such as plot, filming plans, and character descriptions, political controversies related to the Senkaku dispute, the bankruptcy of the production company, the film's cancellation, and continuous subsequent mentions about the film's potential revival. Simply put, the sources listed above amount to a dozen, and there are more available on the internet. Therefore, I don't see why
WP:GNG already.—Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 17:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Keep - I concur with @Mushy Yank and others who believe that the coverage is sufficient to pass the GNG. DCsansei (talk) 23:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I see plenty of superficial coverage about the production difficulties, and exactly one sentence about the plot of the film. I'm not sure how that can be viewed as "significant coverage" of a movie. Owen× ☎ 22:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @
    WP:FFEXCEPTIONS, which has nothing to do with the reason why the film is scrapped or how much about the film details have SIGCOV in sources, but whether the pre-production or legacy demonstrated significance and has notability. The twelve sources I provided already have SIGCOV on these two aspects, so I still don't see a reasonable basis for deletion up until this point in this discussion. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 04:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Let's take an example: the China Times source you provided is about a different film - Daguerrotype, and only mentions 1905 in a side note: In addition, the movie 1905 he was preparing in the past originally had Tony Leung Chiu-wai (Wai Tsai) as the leading actor. That's it. Is that what you call "SIGCOV"? Owen× ☎ 09:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @OwenX: This is ridiculously hilarious. Alternatively, I think I have already proven to you that your assertions were wrong with my previous reply. One, the China Times source does not just have a passing mention of the film, but has a whole paragraph about it. You tried to conceal this fact with your wrongful translation (see below), and I do not agree that one out of three paragraphs of an interview is considered trivial. (especially the film was already scrapped years ago and the interview was basing on another project) Two, there is nothing wrong with citing an interview of the director in another project according to SIGCOV, so your attempts to refute the China Times, Sina, Liberty Times, and Natalie sources simply because they are interviews of Daguerrotype were wrong. Three, SIGCOV only requires the sources to address the subject topic in detail. It doesn't cover what you expect, simply because you have put the focus elsewhere. I don't see any of the twelve sources I cited failing to cover the pre-production and legacy aspects with SIGCOV. I really don't understand where your confidence came from to continue accusing me of lying, when you seem to be the liar in this case, especially with the misleading translation you provided with the China Times source. Also, I was wondering what is my "amended statement", as I have been holding on to the same one all the time, which is that I don't see why WP:FFEXCEPTIONS should not be applied in this case to override WP:NFF. By the way, this is not even my article. I am just a random passer-by. What's in it for me to be dishonest? Or what agenda could I possibly have? Assuming bad faith much? Or perhaps the real issue is that you were triggered when someone pointed out that your statements contained untrue and misleading elements. And now you are trying to turn the tables with your strawman arguments (still ridiculed by your "this one source with the least coverage mentions so few about the film, so the all other sources you cited, or the sources other users cited must also be the same") and accuse me of being the one who is dishonest, in an attempt to make yourself look more credible. This is my final reply and I will let the closing admin decide. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 11:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • By the way, although I can read Chinese, I used Google Translate to run the China Times source. There is a whole paragraph about 1905, which reads In addition, the movie "1905" he was preparing in the past originally had Tony Leung Chiu-wai as the leading actor. He also came to Taiwan to scout the location, but was unable to start filming for some reason. He said regretfully: "I really want to come to Taiwan to film, of course. I also hope to find Tony Leung to act." Which argument is actually misleading here? —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 10:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @
    Bludgeoning the discussion. Star Mississippi 13:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • @Star Mississippi: I was confused when you said I was bludgeoning, and I just realized there were sock puppets kept on closing the discussion. I have already stated that I will let the closing admin decide. (I was just editing some typos and bolding my arguments further, as I was dissatisfied with someone who was lying accusing me of lying instead in the discussion.) I did not bludgeon. (Not implying anything or anyone specific. But it is childish if someone is trying to accuse a veteran editor on zhwiki with ten thousand edits of sockpuppetry. A simple SPI can easily prove my innocence.) (Edit: Those sockpuppets seem to belong to User:Ivanvectra. I apologize if my previous comment offended anyone. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 13:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC)) —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 13:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    to be clear, I know you're not a sockpuppet. You're an established editor and there's no reason for an SPI involving you. That's a bored troll disrupting AfD over the last week. The timing of the semi to stop from playing whack a sock was coincidental. Opinions may differ on bludgeoning, but I'm glad you'll leave it to a closing admin. Star Mississippi 13:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as a section to Kiyoshi Kurosawa. Although other big names were attached to the production in acting capacities, the film was Kuosawa's project, and it is not uncommon for Wikipedia to associate and list unrealized products with the director. Of course, nothing prevents it from being mentioned in other articles by reference to the section. BD2412 T 22:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: The discussion is recently reopened on 00:04, 6 June 2024‎ per another Wikipedian's request. Since I consistently faced personal attacks and my argument had been constantly twisted, I hereby briefly summarise my stance and rationales once again for the closer or anyone else who may be concerned. Everything I mentioned below can be found above:
I have quoted twelve reliable sources (including five English sources found by Mushy Yank, and seven Chinese and Japanese sources that I found, as I can read those languages and the subject film is a Mandarin-language Japanese production) that provided
WP:FFEXCEPTIONS
. Therefore, I believe this article should be kept.
My initial argument is straightforward, and all the sources I presented are verifiable. One source, the
run-out-of-mill
mentions. I have presented these arguments above twice, but was never addressed. No thorough analysis or substantive arguments basing on the other sources I listed out were raised. Therefore, I respectfully retain my stance of Keep in this relisting, as I believe the film has well fulfilled the criteria of WP:GNG and WP:NFFEXCEPTIONS. I will not summarise or address the opinions of Mushy Yank, Readerofthepack, Timothy, OwenX, DCsansei, and BD2412 to avoid further disputes or being accused of making strawman arguments.
And respectfully, I find it very exhausting to be
assumed bad faith even after this discussion (per talk page of the original closer), merely due to my expression of disagreements with a Wikipedian. While I agree that my word choices may not have been especially mild either, I am uncomfortable of being repeatedly called out for being "dishonest" or accused of "pushing my agenda" to keep my "pet page". Also, just to keep record, I think two sentences I replied in the discussion on the original closer's talk page perfectly sums up the scenario. Did you really review all the sources presented in the discussion thoroughly before you cast your Delete !vote, so you would realise that plenty of the sources are unrelated to production difficulties? Is that also an act of dishonesty? Up till this point, I still see no addresses on why was the sources I cited about pre-production and legacy were mistakenly summarized as covering the production itself (and the subsequent doubts on whether the sources had indeed been reviewed), nor why was the source I clearly mentioned was to prove the film has legacy and fulfill FFEXCEPTIONS, was falsefully trimmed down and quoted to prove that it touches nothing about the film's production details. I guess everyone reading this discussion call tell who is really being dishonest and taking disagreements too personally. That is all I have to comment. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 17:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 21:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

noted in the history but doesn't appear on the logs. Just don't want it to get lost. Courtesy @OwenX: Star Mississippi 21:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not showing as overdue, but definitely is so there's a log issue. Hoping this works this time
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 21:14, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Fails
    WP:NFF. It’s a textbook case. Coverage is only that it was to be made and was cancelled. There is no significant coverage to meet the GNG. There is no significant material, because there is no film. There is nothing to merge anywhere. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep: Although
    WP:FFEXCEPTIONS applies. The topic of the film's planning and pre-production has generated multiple, non-trivial news stories. That coverage is, in my opinion, enough to satisfy the General Notability Guidelines. AstridMitch (talk) 02:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Republic of Pelau (micronation)

Republic of Pelau (micronation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail

WP:BEFORE doesn't give anything either, except, when the term "micronation" is removed from the search, a lot of misspellings of Palau
.

Even assuming the 2006 book does indeed mention Pelau, a single book mentioning it (along with many other such micronations) isn't enough for GNG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:53, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete as a hoax. The Micronations book is accessible through the Internet Archive ([20]) and Pelau is not mentioned anywhere. Astaire (talk) 21:12, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks a lot! Looking at the page range given (pp. 90–93), the book appears to talk about the "Principality of Vikesland" and the "Great United Kiseean Kingdom", but no mention of Pelau at all. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and South Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:12, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Clearly a hoax as stated above, plus the page creator had a similarly-named page (misspelling of another country) speedy deleted a month ago: [21]. I would say speedy delete if an admin hadn't already removed the CSD tag. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:39, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete G3. Mccapra (talk) 08:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Both sources fail
    WP:SIGCOV. Numberguy6 (talk) 16:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

List of Transformers comics characters

List of Transformers comics characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

FANCRUFT list that doesn't include a single source indicating notability of these characters, let alone indicating a necessity for having a whole list focusing on them; in contrast to a similar page for the film characters. Most sections consist solely of brief summaries of these comic-exclusive characters, if they include any summaries at all. PanagiotisZois (talk) 18:32, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khar-polis

AfDs for this article:
Khar-polis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources found. Zero citations for 16 years. External link is a YouTube video called "KHARPOLICE 2" purporting to show "Iranian men playing Kharpolis" at Cachuma Lake, California, in 2010. (And the only comment on the video is "CHINCHE AL AGUA" which I guess is supposed to verify that the Mexican game is the same as the Iranian game.) Either this is

WP:HOAX. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:15, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete Previous AfD in 2008 addressed only
WP:NOTGUIDE accusations and did not address the lack of sourcing. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Also, the only edits by the creator were to create and crosslink this article at 17:25, 29 September 2008. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:39, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Gumaan

AfDs for this article:
Bad Gumaan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't even find ROTM coverage, much less sig/in-depth coverage, so fails GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 16:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:04, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zamil Steel

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

Delete Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORGSIG. The sources are almost entirely PR-based or non-independent. No actual in-depth coverage in reliable secondary sources, just press releases and blog posts. Wikilover3509 (talk) 14:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Company actually seems notable to me, even though the article is terrible. This already can help for an introduction, and a section on their practices. Here is a case study, whose facts we can assume to be reliable. This is obviously not acceptable, yet its promotional claims indicate that the company is likely notable. Drmies (talk) 14:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Saudi Arabia. Shellwood (talk) 16:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It would be worth considering the present article about this subsidiary company in the wider context of articles on the parent company Zamil Industrial (created around the same time by the same editor) and Zamil Group Holding (created more recently). Do each have sufficient specific notability to justify multiple article here?AllyD (talk) 07:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: I have fixed spacing in the header that broke some of the links, but have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:04, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of ESPN Radio personalities

List of ESPN Radio personalities (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not just it is entirely unsourced, this does not meet the

WP:LISTN as this grouping isn't discussed in non-primary sources. Definitely useful as a category than being a standalone list. SpacedFarmer (talk) 12:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:04, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: I'm not sure the nom did a proper
    WP:NLIST based on some searching. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:31, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Harry Dunn (defender)

Harry Dunn (defender) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm a bit unsure about this one, as he seemed to have a rather robust career, but it was entirely at the non-league, semi-pro level. There doesn't seem to be much of any

WP:SIGCOV outside of this local newspaper coverage. I'd like to see what consensus is here, as it feels like a "delete" for me, but I'm curious what others think. Anwegmann (talk) 17:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looks like delete, but out of respect to the previous relister who sought a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus, this should have one final relisting to allow for some additional discussion, any at all.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Wayward Realms

The Wayward Realms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The game has only recently launched a Kickstarter and while there seems to be a bunch of positive press about the potential of this eventual game, that does not mean that it will actually happen (a bit of

WP:CRYSTAL combined with the unsure nature of Kickstarter campaigns). I'm not necessarily advocating deletion outright, but I also do not think this should have been accepted from the Draft space (new reviewer etc etc) and should be returned there until it's actually released. Primefac (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Great Lakes Arena Football

Great Lakes Arena Football (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very minimal significant coverage from reliable sources; majority of sources are from a suspected fan site. Could not find recent coverage in a

WP:GNG. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 15:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose There's only one link to a Facebook page, the others are to a local newspaper while the others are to a very reliable site, which is in use for most minor league articles. This league is equivalent to the
AfD. [reply
]
Oppose I don't see any reason for deletion. This is a pro league, and the article is well sited. StanleyKey (talk) 00:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem I see here is I don't see any other source besides OurSportsCentral, Muskegon Sports, and local team sources. I'm expecting more than just those sources here. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 21:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's clearly a minor league and Our Sports Central is as good of a source you can get for leagues below the Major level. BabyBOY789 (talk) 21:06, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, there's Muskegon Sports for West Michigan Ironmen coverage, but what about coverage for the other teams? Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 21:33, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:32, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - other than the articles from "Muskegon Sports" there isn't anything else produced here or in the article to pass GNG. The Muskegon Sports articles are more relevant for the West Michigan Ironmen than this league anyway. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:42, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Swatting of American politicians (2023–2024)

Swatting of American politicians (2023–2024) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Propose article be deleted or at least moved to draft. At present this article seems to be little more than a list of news articles with no wider encyclopaedic merit (

WP:OR
).

Given the contentious topic nature of the subject matter feel it's best that the article be removed from at least main space until such a time it's improved or demonstrates merit for inclusion. Rambling Rambler (talk) 14:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as discussed on the article talk page, multiple reliable sources referred to the incidents in relationship with one another and noted that some politicians reacted with the proposed legislation to enact harsher sentences for swatting. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This is part of a notable pattern of harnessing elected officials. It doesn't seem to be going away, and has the possibility of getting worse, or spreading to other countries. — Maile (talk) 16:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. 108.18.142.185 (talk) 23:34, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Static Line (magazine)

Static Line (magazine) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources and the article only links to primary sources. toweli (talk) 17:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ISO 15292

ISO 15292 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This doesn't appear to meet

WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 16:51, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Fairmont State Fighting Falcons

Fairmont State Fighting Falcons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

They don't appear to be a notable team, playing in a small, regional league. No sourced info so not sure it is worth merging anywhere. Potentially a redirect to university or league. Boleyn (talk) 16:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steljano Velo

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

Velo only played in the lower levels of Albanian football and doesn't seem to have any

WP:SIGCOV. My own searches only yielded database sources. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 15:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Ray Mueller (politician)

Ray Mueller (politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

primary sources that aren't support for notability at all, and community hyperlocals within the county being cited only to verify that he campaigned for and/or won election to the job rather than analyzing his work in the job.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the article from having to be written and sourced more substantially than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:43, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Jaime Stein

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

Lack of significant coverage in independent sources. Hirolovesswords (talk) 14:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need more people to participate in AfD discussions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 15:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete The "oursportscentral" article is a rather typical "new job announcement" and doesn't do much to support GNG. The Vancouver Sun 2004 article is a single sentence. The Rotman article is not independent, it's one of those alumnus blurbs. While it might provide some facts it is a good bet that they come directly from the subject. The only possible significant article I see is the Vancouver Sun 2005 one. It talks about the subject as beginning a career, and given that was in 2005 I would expect to have seen later articles about a career, but I don't. Lamona (talk) 22:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 15:35, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Even in .ca sources, there is hardly anything. I agree with the nom's review of the sources, most aren't helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 17:04, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of ESPN personalities

List of ESPN personalities (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not just it is entirely unsourced, this does not meet the

WP:LISTN as this grouping isn't discussed in non-primary sources. Definitely useful as a category than being a standalone list. SpacedFarmer (talk) 12:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 15:34, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Sports Illustrated writers

List of Sports Illustrated writers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not just it is entirely unsourced, this does not meet the

WP:LISTN as this grouping isn't discussed in non-primary sources. Definitely useful as a category than being a standalone list. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 15:34, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Senya Son

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

Russian pianist and composer. Compliance with

WP:MUSIC has not been demonstrated. Some of it looks like a hoax. The article was deleted in Russian Wikipedia [36].--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 13:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 15:33, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Lodge

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

self-published websites of his own employers rather than any evidence of third-party reliable source coverage about his work in media or books. Bearcat (talk) 15:33, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

BBC Choice

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

BBC Three was BBC Choice until 2003 Coddlebean (talk) 15:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coddlebean (talk) 15:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Coddlebean, I don't understand your deletion rationale. Can you explain why we should delete the BBC Choice page? Toughpigs (talk) 16:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    tv channel bbc three's original name was bbc choice Coddlebean (talk) 23:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So what? Why is that a reason to delete this page? Toughpigs (talk) 00:41, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. The main problem I have with the article is that all of the sources given are to the BBC. If some decent independent secondary sources can be added then OK. Athel cb (talk) 19:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a cursory view of Google Scholar shows this appears to have received non-BBC coverage. If a detailed review proves that insufficient and no other independent RS'es are identified, then merge to BBC three. Jclemens (talk) 22:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural keep: The nominator has not provided any rationale for deletion; for all that I understand, it might actually be a request to merge, or even an edit request. This should be closed as keep, with the opportunity to reopen it with a proper deletion rationale. Toughpigs (talk) 00:46, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Barrett (rock climber)

Charlie Barrett (rock climber) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

notable only because of a single event,

WP:BLP1E should apply, wp is not a news site Artem.G (talk) 15:16, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Artur Ocheretny

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

notable only from a single event, his marriage to Putin's ex-wife;

WP:BLP1E applies Artem.G (talk) 15:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Argument in favor of keeping the article:
- I found this deletion request because I was interested in learning more about Ocheretny, I presume others may also be interested Blaadjes (talk) 08:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Accidentally submitted before I was done, sorry, new to this!
Another reason:
He has been investigated and had properties seized, possibly he and his wife receive millions of dollars from Putin, which might make him more interesting to the public. The article could use some work, but I think it should stay. Blaadjes (talk) 08:29, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Southport Sockman

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

Fails

WP:NCRIME. Mdann52 (talk) 14:56, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Kyne

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

The article has no clear topic. It appears like it may be trying to be a

dictionary entry. Sourcing is nearly non-existent. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 14:42, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Keep. It looks like it underwent an edit to get more inline with other surname entries. I think the page should be renamed to Kyne (surname). I would also support a Redirect to Coyne (surname) if that article were fleshed out to include this variant.
Lindsey40186 (talk) 15:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The sourcing and sources support a short surname/DAB page. As we now have. Deletion is not cleanup. Guliolopez (talk) 17:57, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Kyne (surname) does sound like a good solution Either way I'm sure there are other well known Kyne articles to be written, such as Raymond Kyne, Irish industrial designer, artist, stamp designer and past-president of the Society of Designers in Ireland, now called the Institute of Designers in Ireland. ww2censor (talk) 10:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Since an editor unilaterally chose a topic for the article and replaced all the content present at the time of nomination, none of my original nomination stands. The replacement article is a fine stub. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 11:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Concern expressed by nom was valid when the article was in the state that it was at the time, though it appears an adequate
    WP:BEFORE check may not have been done. It's a valid name SIA now and nom has agreed to keep so I'd recommend a speedy close. I'd also recommend moving Kyne to Kyne (surname) and turning Kyne into a DAB, given the other two topics listed in the hatnote, over which the surname does not seem to have prominence. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 04:04, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Courtesy ping @Athel cb: AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 04:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Droners

AfDs for this article:
Droners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail

WP:GNG
. Tagged for notability since 2022.

None of the other 6 language articles appears to have any citations that can be used to establish notability.

Previous AfD ended in no consensus, so I am trying again to determine if this is notable and should be kept, or if it isn't and should be deleted or redirected. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was redirect‎ to

(non-admin closure) Reywas92Talk 15:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

List of prime ministerial trips made by Lawrence Wong

List of prime ministerial trips made by Lawrence Wong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Merge content to List of international prime ministerial trips made by Lawrence Wong Gjs238 (talk) 11:43, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dude just do it, obviously these are the exact same topic and don't need a discussion to fix the second creator's mistake of not seeing the first page. Reywas92Talk 18:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Withdraw proposal. This was clearly the incorrect forum. Gjs238 (talk) 21:43, 16 June 2024 (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.

SAP implementation

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

No real sources, reads like a manual, mostly copied from manuals? — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 10:01, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:24, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Gary Epesso

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

Stats stub on a footballer with no evidence of meeting

WP:GNG. The best sources that I could find in Philippine media were Dugout, a passing mention, and a Wordpress blog, which is neither reliable nor significant. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Kim Kong-il

Kim Kong-il (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Whilst a cap usually means you pass

WP:GNG, I don't see this being the case here. His 'claim to fame' is one friendly match against Vietnam with this source confirming that it was only an 8 minute cameo. This stats stub should be deleted unless someone can provide evidence that Kim meets GNG. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Kim Ju-myong

Kim Ju-myong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

His only 'claim to notability' is playing as a substitute in one friendly match against Bangladesh. There is no reasonable chance of this passing

WP:SPORTBASIC but I'm happy to be proved wrong if people can present significant coverage of him. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:22, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Matthiew Araya

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

The player debuted when he was incredibly young but then disappeared. I'm struggling to even find routine coverage. No evidence that this complies with

WP:SPORTBASIC and the current database sources are unacceptable on their own. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:08, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Ballymoreen (disambiguation)

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

There are now only two articles about this topic:

WP:ONEOTHER). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:08, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Indrit Sejko

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

Whilst I note that Sejko was extraordinarily young when he made his professional debut, I can't seem to find any coverage of him in Albanian media. Furthermore, I can't find any information about him after his debut; he seems to have disappeared. Does not meet

WP:SIGCOV occur later in his career as he is still only 18. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Battle of Devarakonda

Battle of Devarakonda (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Couldn't find a single reliable source mentioning a battle called the "Battle of Devarkonda." This makes it clear that the article is fabricated. It was created and modified by socks who were disrupting articles related to Indian military conflicts. The article lacks notability, and no sources cover this conflict in detail or refer to it as the "Battle of Devarkonda." Created by socks/continuous disruptors for self pleasure. Imperial[AFCND] 09:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, and India. Imperial[AFCND] 09:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment- The repeated mentioning of "Muslim" in the lead itself is enough to identify the the target of the creator (ofcourse, the user is blocked).Imperial[AFCND] 09:10, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Mccapra (talk) 09:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unsourced. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 10:17, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Being unsourced is a not a reason for deletion because it can be fixed through editing. In this case, however, notability does not appear to be established. C F A 💬 15:59, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I don't think this is a hoax. It is briefly mentioned in some pages online, like this blog/article. Regardless, it certainly doesn't meet
    WP:NMIL with this little coverage. C F A 💬 15:57, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @Clearfrienda We have seen numerous unreliable sources that discuss rewritten and inaccurate history, often contradicting well-established sources. I do not consider those blogs and write-ups to be credible, especially since such biased South Asian blogs are widely available online. The site linked above itself contains praise and many biased writings. Imperial[AFCND] 16:26, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep. Source by Dr. M.A. Haque, lecturer in history, Regional college of Education, Bhubaneswar, Orissa on page 33 talks about the battle at Devarakonda. Page needs to be fixed with background where Bahamanis sieged Devarakonda. More reliable sources will be helpful. 2 other sources, I was not able to verify. RangersRus (talk) 16:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete for notability. The first source is a paper book that I cannot access online. The second ref (Subrahmanyam 1957) links back to the article. The third source, a book from 1980, looks legitimate but only mentions the battle on one page (which you can access by entering "Devarakonda" into the search function provided). So we have enough accessible sources to show that the battle took place and a few basics about who fought and who won. I say draftify if even one person volunteers to make improvements. Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:52, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Andrews (actor)

AfDs for this article:
Brian Andrews (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Working actor, reasonable career, but I couldn't find sources available to confirm he meets

WP:GNG. Lots of mentions on less reliable sites/blogs. Weak keep in 2006 when our standards were much lower. Boleyn (talk) 07:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:59, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete: it's not about whether the roles are significant or not, it is about whether the role is significant or not. and so far... the only significant role i can find is his role as tommy doyle from halloween. other roles/movies listed in the article do not really make him significant, failing
WP:NACTOR brachy08 (chat here lol) 08:56, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

WEEE-LP

WEEE-LP (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Tennessee. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep The station was Knoxville's UPN affiliate in the early 2000s and got some significant coverage in that era. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: The sources added by Sammi give the subject
    WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Elizabeth Young, Lady Kennet

Elizabeth Young, Lady Kennet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This subject fails

WP:GNG today and is unlikely to garner more substantial coverage in the future due to her being so dead. JFHJr (㊟) 05:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

keep as meeting
WP:BASIC
. This is not an easy pass -- her books have a relatively low citation count but she has had an impact. Old London Churches seems to have been regarded as a significant work and has been cited quite a bit in the context of for conservation efforts received a number of reviews which are not available online. She got obituaries in the Independent and Telegraph which I think counts for a lot. Here are the sources I think taken together are sufficient:
  • this book review[41]
  • this obit in the Independent[42]
  • this obituary in the Telegraph [43]
  • minimal discussion about her in her husband's biography [44]
  • this obituary, albeit in a low-circulation paper[45]
  • this entry showing that her papers are now held under supervision of the UK national archives[46]
One note: immediately prior to bringing this AfD the nominator removed more than 4K of text from the article including removing her extensive biography. I'm not sure how that is justified - surely if the books exist they are sources, although whether they count for notability may be another matter. I wholly agree with @DaffodilOcean's decision to reinstate them, and to identify additional cites. Oblivy (talk) 01:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Sweetser

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

This subject fails

WP:GNG and has no particular claim to notability. JFHJr (㊟) 05:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: This as well, gives a few paragraphs to his career to that point [52] and a book review here [53] Oaktree b (talk) 14:53, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Please scroll to the bottom of the article and the Authority control databases. There are international results there, meaning his works are published in those countries. The Library of Congress returns 20 resources on his works. . — Maile (talk) 03:34, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on

"soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 17:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Clap note

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

I couldn't establish for sure that this is notable. It has been unreferenced and tagged for notability for many years, and there don't seem to be the amount of sources available to show notability. Boleyn (talk) 07:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: no sources, seems to be made up. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 10:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: no references to this term that I can find online other than this article, no matches in Google Books or archive.org. Assuming it existed in the first place, it doesn't seem to have entered public usage. Adam Sampson (talk) 15:17, 16 June 2024 (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.

Collat School of Business

Collat School of Business (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails

WP: N. The only sources on the articles are either primary, databases, or closely match the wording of a primary source. PROD was removed without sufficient sourcing improvements. HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

To clarify, I'm not opposed to sourcing improvements that would establish notability. This AfD merely describes the state of the article when it was dePRODed. HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:25, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 08:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect - to the University. Barring unique circumstances, the general consensus has always been that law schools and medical schools get articles and other sub-schools get a redirect or nothing at all. See
    SCHOOLOUTCOMES. There is nothing here and nothing rising to the level of GNG that I could find to indicate this school is an exception to the general consensus. If this article was about a business rather than a business school, it would be an A7 CSD. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 15:53, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Redirect - to the main UABpage. Sources used are primarily primary, and in digging, I was unable to pull any that meet
    WP: N. Obviously, just because I wasn't able to find those those kinds of sources isn't definitive, however, I understand the preferred treatment, if warranted, is to build out a supporting UAB academics page. The Academics section of the main UAB page would be the where the editor would want to start placing this information MertenMerten (talk) 19:02, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep I already added secondary sources. It has met
    WP: N criteria. Also, it avoids confusion with the business school at University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa.Juicy fruit146 (talk) 20:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    I already added secondary sources.

    Those sources are databases or closely match the wording of a primary source, none of which can be used to establish notability.

    Also, it avoids confusion with the business school at University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa.

    This is not a valid reason for why an article should be kept under
    WP: N
    .

    It has met WP: N criteria.

    You are free to baselessly claim, as the article's creator, that article meets notability guidelines. In its current state, it does not. HyperAccelerated (talk) 16:38, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    These are not baseless claims you haven't checked the secondary sources I added!.
    Shortcut
    WP:SIGCOV
    "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
    The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM.
    Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton, that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band.
    "Reliable" means that sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability. Juicy fruit146 (talk) 17:38, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you want to annoy and delete a school/colleges page, you better check UCLA's collleges and school, most of there references are directly linked to the institution, not a single secondary sources but you wanted to delete this page with sufficient secondary sources I added, and yet you are ignoring it. Juicy fruit146 (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your time is better served finding better sources instead of calling a volunteer annoying, branding them as ignorant, or demanding they read a page which has nothing to do with the AfD. This AfD is about sourcing, so of the sources currently in the article diff:
    • The Belanger article is
      WP: ROUTINE
      coverage of the renaming of the school.
    • The Watson article isn't reliable. Who is this guy, and how do we know he didn't make up everything in the article?
    • The Lewis article was written by a high schooler and doesn't provide much information beyond that UAB's business program was ranked by the USNWR. I'd argue that this coverage is routine, and even if it isn't, there isn't much to make an article with.
    • There's two sources that are databases and can't be used to establish notability.
    Anyway, nothing in this AfD stops anyone from putting information about the business school on the main UAB page, so I'm kind of surprised that there's such an aggressive push to keep the article. HyperAccelerated (talk) 18:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    that's why it's called a secondary source because it only addresses the topic not the main topic and my sources are reliable and somehow you degraded a high school writer and still a reliable source. Your intentions are not really into the topic, you are trying to degrade my sources when in fact it is a criteria for nobility. Juicy fruit146 (talk) 18:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you still had doubts, I'll add as many secondary sources everyday until you get out of here. Juicy fruit146 (talk) 18:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    and btw those are published articles that you are trying to belittle, and it means it has met the criteria for notability even if the writer is a high school, a farmer, or a homeless man. Juicy fruit146 (talk) 19:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: As nominator, I'm okay with a redirect to the main University of Alabama at Birmingham article as an AtD. HyperAccelerated (talk) 16:38, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No need for redirect, I already added secondary sources. Juicy fruit146 (talk) 17:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Relisting comment: There is a rough consensus to Redirect this article but in light of the newly added sources, I'd appreciate some editors reviewing them before closing this discussion.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    List of A.D. Isidro Metapan players

    List of A.D. Isidro Metapan players (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
    (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

    WP:LISTN is not met here due to a lack of coverage of the subjects as a group. As it stands, this is an indiscriminate list of mostly non-notable people. Let'srun (talk) 03:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Yet this list only includes a self-selected number of players, many of whom have no article themselves, and has no sources discussing these players as a group. In my opinion, it is much more appropriate to have a category for the notable players who played here. Let'srun (talk) 17:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Which is fixable through editing, and nowhere in NLIST does it require sources to discuss the list as a group, since there are several valid reasons for creating lists. SportingFlyer T·C 18:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete – a category for the players from this club is enough. Svartner (talk) 19:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Relisting comment: Still no consensus. User:SportingFlyer, I see your remarks as a Keep vote, no?
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Liz: I specifically didn't !vote keep because the article's not in good shape, but I'm not a delete. The deletion rationale is flawed - LISTN does not require a source listing the subjects as a group, and it's not indiscriminate. SportingFlyer T·C 08:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Sack of Wiślica

    Sack of Wiślica (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
    (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

    As

    I hereby formally propose to either draftify

    Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135)
    ).

    Rationale:

    WP:RS
    is Benyskiewicz (2020), and that this source alone is not enough.

    The disagreement is that

    WP:BEFORE), whereas User:Marcelus and I think that this event could easily be summarised in 1 to 3 sentences in Wiślica#History by reference to Benyskiewicz (2020), at least for now. Alternately, Marcelus and I think the current article could be draftified for now, but Piotrus has declined my offer to adopt it as a draft, citing having too little time to do it himself, and proposing to add Template:Sources exist to motivate other users to do it instead. However, the template does not allow such usage (see also Wikipedia:But there must be sources!
    ). I have argued that the present situation of keeping the article in the mainspace as is, is not acceptable either, because it evidently is not ready for the mainspace (if it ever merits a stand-alone article at all).

    So, if nobody is willing to adopt the draft, Marcelus and I are proposing to redirect

    WP:BRD
    . But if there is consensus in this AfD to create a redirect, this may not be reverted BOLDly again until the conditions above for a stand-alone page are met.

    Other than that I would like to say that I have generally enjoyed cooperating with Piotrus on this topic amicably. But a formal decision seems to be necessary to break the deadlock on the future of this article, and Piotrus has suggested that taking it to AfD a second time might settle the matter, so here I am. Good day to everyone. :) NLeeuw (talk) 06:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Keep. As I said on article's talk page, we have one in-depth academic source already, and indications that more sources exist (but are hard to access due to being Polish and not digitized well): "BEFORE search in GBooks in Polish strongly suggests other sources exist. Ex. this book by
      WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP
      . The topic seems notable.
    Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete per nom and good summary of my position by the nominator Marcelus (talk) 09:34, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete and/or userfy - we cannot keep indefinitely an article without reliable modern coverage. - Altenmann >talk 23:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 02:36, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Thai representatives at international male beauty pageants

    List of Thai representatives at international male beauty pageants (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
    (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

    This page seems to be almost exclusively cited to a random Facebook fanpage "ThailandBeautyQueen" and is probably the WP:OR of the account who inserted the links in a series of November 2023 edits, subsequently blocked as a sockpuppet of

    WP:TNT. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Relisting comment: Looking into this article (which has been a magnet for sockpuppet and blocked accounts), it was originally at AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mister Thailand before it was renamed so it is not eligible for Soft Deletion. Hopefully, another relisting will bring out editors who have opinions about the value (or lack of it) for articles on national representatives at beauty pageants.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:27, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    James Cade

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

    Not

    significant coverage. Searches for sources produce more of the same. — HTGS (talk) 02:08, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Karsten Henriksen

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

    Fails

    WP:COI as the editor is a single topic editor, and claims to own the copyright of a picture of the subject. Melmann 11:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Canada. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep, but edit. This article needs substantial trimming and rewriting to change it from a resume to a Wikipedia page. However the subject is the president of
      WP:NPROF. Qflib (talk) 03:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      I've made a number of edits towards
      WP:NOTRESUME; hope this is helpful. Qflib (talk) 03:37, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      @Qflib Is Northlands College a “major academic institution”? I can't even find it among any of the major university rankings (but, it's possible I'm just bad at searching). Melmann 07:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Historically we look for schools to offer masters degrees or higher as one indication of whether it qualifies (this excludes community colleges). This school qualifies under that criterion. Qflib (talk) 20:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Isn't this entity the result of three community colleges joining together? In any case, what would be a (non-major) academic institution? Like a vocational school? Melmann 09:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      A vocational school does not offer graduate degrees (masters or higher). I would not consider a college that only offers associate and/or bachelor’s degrees and is not otherwise notable to be “major.”
      There are a few R1 universities that started off as teacher’s colleges and only offered bachelor’s degrees originally. So IMO the history of how the college came to be isn’t directly relevant as to whether it is currently “major” for our purposes here. Qflib (talk) 13:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      How an institution is established isn’t relevant. Public Institutions in Canada are established by law… passed by the government. There are numerous institutions that started as a college for example Yukon University that do exceptionally valuable work. 2001:56A:6FE1:B447:911:8C81:F497:9BCE (talk) 02:34, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. I don't think Northlands is major enough to qualify for #C6, and we should go through GNG instead. All our sources are currently PR fluff, stories about Northlands, or stories about the one event of him becoming head of Northlands. I don't think that's enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I agree about GNG. But since we don't have a specific definition of what "major" means in
      WP:NPROF, I do tend to think we should assume that a school fits the criterion if they offer one or more graduate degrees, or if they are a historically significant institution (like Oberlin or Byrn Mawr). Of course, I respect your opinion to the contrary. Qflib (talk) 20:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      In this case, it appears to be a conglomeration of three community colleges. I think we've generally held that community colleges don't count for this. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Northlands College is a public institution service 50 percent of the landmass of Saskatchewan. As a public institution it offers a comprehensive array of programs from adult education to masters degrees with an indigenous student population of over 90 percent. I think the confusion here is the understanding of higher education in the USA vs Canada. 2001:56A:6FF0:41DD:55A9:9553:A7EA:A447 (talk) 11:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      David, this particular institution offers bachelors degrees and at least one master’s degree, unless I’m reading this wrong. If I’m wrong, apologies. Qflib (talk) 13:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 02:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Keep the individual is the coauthor of the Nunavut Arctic College/Memorial University Transformational Agreement which has been noted by numerous media outlets and leaders
    https://higheredstrategy.com/better-northern-higher-education-strategy/ 24.72.14.113 (talk) 02:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Saint George S.C. players

    List of Saint George S.C. players (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
    (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

    No evidence this list of self-selected players meets the

    WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Delete. The club was founded in 1935 and such a list would purport to include players from the club's entire existence. There is a huge
      WP:V barrier that I don't see this list overcoming. How to verify which players played for Saint George SC, how many matches (i.e. who surpassed the 50-match mark, 100, 250 etc.) and when? To me that would seem equally impossible as maintaining and updating the list. Finally, deleting it removes nothing of value, as a category does the job much better. Geschichte (talk) 14:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Relisting comment: The current arguments to keep are fairly weak: are there independent sources for the list entries? Maybe we can come to a consensus by remedying this apparent lack of independent coverage (or by determining that there is not significant independent coverage).
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 01:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Delete According to Wikipedia's notability guidelines, lists of people, including players of sports teams, must demonstrate significant coverage in independent, reliable sources to warrant inclusion. Upon review, the article lacks sufficient citations from such sources to establish the notability of individual players. While Saint George S.C. is a notable club, the roster of its players as presented does not meet the threshold for inclusion as per Wikipedia's policies on verifiability and notability. Therefore, based on the current state of the article and the adherence to Wikipedia's guidelines, deletion is warranted unless substantial, reliable sources are provided to establish the significance of the players listed. This action ensures the integrity and reliability of information presented on Wikipedia, maintaining standards of verifiability and notability across all articles.Yakov-kobi (talk) 19:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      That's not really true - lists do not need to demonstrate the notability of individual items. Furthermore there's plenty of sources in the article such as [66] which clearly shows by listing all of the Ugandans which have played for the club that the information is available, probably in Amharic. SportingFlyer T·C 16:20, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Morgan Williams (footballer, born 2004)

    Morgan Williams (footballer, born 2004) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
    (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

    Fails

    WP:SIGCOV, as everything I could find is either South London local press or directly from club websites. Anwegmann (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    • 5 appearances as a professional with ongoing career Aren't we looking for
      WP:SIGCOV? The two sources you mention are routine coverage. Robby.is.on (talk) 08:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Keep - May not be much to the article but satisfies
      WP:GNG. MaskedSinger (talk) 08:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Draftify – The two articles linked by GiantSnowman here are routine coverage. Of the five sources in the article three are database entries, two are from AFC Wimbledon and Woking, clubs the player has played for. So far, we don't have anything close to
      WP:SIGCOV. Robby.is.on (talk) 10:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]

    Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
    Relisting comment: I considered closing as no consensus--without additional good arguments I think that this is where this will end up.
    Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 01:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Delete: The first source is a database, the second is an interview, the third is all of two sentences of routine transactional coverage, and the final two sources are more stats databases. The sources provided in this discussion are likewise just a few sentences about a couple of matches, and can hardly be called in depth or significant. Bottom line, there isn't any
      WP:TOOSOON. Let'srun (talk) 03:10, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]

    Ntokozo Vidima

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

    I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet

    WP:SPORTCRIT. The most I found were a few sentences here. JTtheOG (talk) 00:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Second Battle of Robotyne

    Second Battle of Robotyne (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
    (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

    We do not need a page for every minor battle in this war. The bulk of the paragraph for the battle consisted of Russian Telegram links and ISW sources. The links to the ISW sources were dead, and I couldn't access which date the sources were coming from. The sources reporting the Russian capture of the town and second battle could easily be input into the page for Robotyne itself, as it doesn't have SIGCOV or notability in the sources mentioned to establish the second battle as it's own page.

    I agree, since we never created page for first battle of Robotyne during 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive, but instead have a information in 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive and Robotyne pages so I don't think it will be necessary to create page for second battle of Robotyne either. Hyfdghg (talk) 19:43, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Tagging @Super Dromaeosaurus, @Alexiscoutinho, @Cinderella157, @RadioactiveBoulevardier, and @RopeTricks as they're all active in pages regarding the invasion of Ukraine. Jebiguess (talk) 21:52, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Draftify seems the best course of action for now. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 21:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I agree it is hardly notable and barely has a tactical or strategic importance. In fact, it's mostly a symbolic victory to undo the Ukrainian counteroffensive. If Russia reaches the trenches further north and levels the front, then we can start talking about some tactical notability. With that being said, I don't mind a draftification. And by the way, what's the deal with the generic dev-isw refs?! Where are the editors getting them from?! Alexis Coutinho (talk) 22:10, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      According to the user @HappyWith, the ProveIt citation tool has a serious problem with ISW pages; see discussion 1, discussion 2, discussion 3. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 05:52, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Oh, I see. Thanks! Alexis Coutinho (talk) 03:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agree, we don't need an article for every minor battle. We must weigh coverage against
      WP:NOTNEWS (routine coverage) when we are mainly confined to NEWSORG sources. Content is best placed at the town's article and potentially in a higher level article. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:51, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      In my view, this conflict in particular has revealed the limitations of NEWSORGs wrt fog of war. Hindsight, on the other hand is 20/20. A good example is Battle of Moshchun, which was only created eleven momths later. Follow-on sources can change the picture considerably. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 11:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete thank you Jebiguess for starting this AfD and for pinging me. I agree with the topic not being notable. The engagements during the 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive in Robotyne were much more notable, being the bulk of the counteroffensive at its later stages, and yet it doesn't have a page (nor should it have one). These engagements are significantly less notable and there isn't much distinguishing them from other Russian-led offensive actions in the frontline during this time other than the symbolic value. By the way, perhaps my sources of information on the war are biased, but as far as I know Robotyne hasn't fallen and has been subject to a back-and-forth, the contents of the article maybe contain original research. The start and end dates most likely do, as usual with these articles on minor engagements.
    I personally don't care if the article is draftified but I really don't see it becoming an article ever in the future so we might as well not delay its fate and delete it. Super Ψ Dro 22:57, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t think this is the right course of action to take. Yes, the sources are questionable, but I think the better solution is to find better sources and update information accordingly. And yes, it’s a minor battle tactically, but it’s an important battle symbolically, as the liberation of Robotnye was one of the only gains made during Ukraine’s 2023 counteroffensive. LordOfWalruses (talk) 02:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment expanding on my “draftify” vote…first of all the battle isn’t even over. And while the Russians may see it as merely a psychological thing, at least one Ukrainian source (Bohdan Myroshnykov) has written in strong terms that the defense of Robotyne is key to the defense of Orikhiv, much as Synkivka is key to the defense of Kupiansk. The idea behind draftifying is that drafts are cheap, and even though notability isn’t super likely to emerge from follow-on analyses, some material is likely be useful for related articles. I’ll address others’ points separately. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 11:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I don't oppose draftifying but I'm not certain of a benefit/distinction between that and moving relevant content to Robotyne for example (if not already there). For the benefit of others, retaining it as a draft (for now) does not imply it will become an article, only that it might become an article if good quality sources (rather than routine NEWSORG reporting) indicate long-term notability. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    José Dávila

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

    Reserve goalkeeper who made three top-flight appearances in Peru before disappearing. No evidence of notability. The closest to

    WP:SIGCOV I found was a few sentences here. JTtheOG (talk) 00:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Piero Cabel

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

    I am unable to find enough coverage of this footballer to meet

    WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 00:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2024_June_16&oldid=1229493487"