Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 12

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
< May 11 May 13 >

Purge server cache

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

The result was keep‎. ✗plicit 23:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Hanna's Animal Adventures

Jack Hanna's Animal Adventures (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:GNG; no sources. Merge with Jack Hanna. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 23:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep Although it can be said that a few of the sources from the analysis above are "run of the mills" reviews, but regardless SIG coverage is established here. X (talk) 14:28, 19 May 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.
  • Post-close comment: So why doesn't someone edit the article to add in the new sources? Mvcg66b3r (talk) 23:54, 19 May 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 merge‎ to Amantia peruana. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:56, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amantia peruana peruana

Amantia peruana peruana (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)

Subspecies are not inherently notable, while species are. Author declines to merge to the species article. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:57, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to Amantia peruana. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amantia peruana infasciata

Amantia peruana infasciata (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)

Subspecies are not inherently notable, while species are. Author declines to merge to the species article. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are many subspecies based articles. If you want to remove them the why not remove all of them? See Category:subspecies Uploader1234567890 (talk) 14:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, subspecies are not inherently notable. That doesn't mean no subspecies are notable, just that the notability of a subspecies must be demonstrated. Your argument is
WP:WHATABOUTISM and that doesn't fly here. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Merge to
    Amantia peruana peruana. There isn't any new information in each subspecies article that isn't in the species article, except an unsourced sentence about etymology. It would be great to see additional information about the subspecies, but it would still be more appropriate for a merged article presenting all the information in one place rather than three separate articles with a high level of duplication. Mgp28 (talk) 22:05, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    This is an acceptable (and expected)
    WP:ATD. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Merge per
WP:PM would have been a better venue for this. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Merger was proposed but rejected by the author. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@
WP:OWN it. They can't unilaterally reject merging it, any more than they can unilaterally reject its deletion. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:26, 20 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Gilbert mayoral election

2012 Gilbert mayoral election (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 per

WP:MILL Okmrman (talk) 22:37, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Discussion on a possible move can be discussed on the article talk page.

(non-admin closure) Let'srun (talk) 22:24, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

List of most-disliked YouTube videos

AfDs for this article:
List of most-disliked YouTube videos (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)

If this list isn't wildly out of date now, it eventually will be. Dislikes on Youtube cannot be reliably counted anymore. The last deletion discussion decided to keep it for so-called "historical relevance", but I don't see how historical relevance justifies having an article that just progressively worsens with no hope of fixing it unless there's a chance of YouTube returning the dislike count. ―Howard • 🌽33 22:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, nothing has changed since the last AFD attempt. There is sufficient coverage of this topic even if dislikes no longer exist. Esolo5002 (talk) 22:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's the problem. Nothing has changed and ever will change about Wikipedia's list, which means it's always going to be inaccurate and eventually won't be able to provide any list that is consistent with what reliable sources consider to be "the most disliked videos". ―Howard • 🌽33 23:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, Since allegedly there is still an extension to check dislikes.
Thehistorianisaac (talk) 23:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The extension is merely a very rough estimate and will never be a reliable source. ―Howard • 🌽33 08:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, since this list's topic is covered by multiple reliable sources. That said, I think a requested move discussion might be worth it. The addition of something like "(2010–2021)" would help make the title much more precise at this cost of a little concision. I hope that would address some of the nominators concerns. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I disagree that article needs to be renamed as there are still videos that get dislikes to today despite not being publicly available. Some sources to justify
    WP:LISTN would help. Conyo14 (talk) 04:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Any RS coverage of “the most disliked YouTube videos” post-2021 would most likely be referring to the current most disliked videos in reality. If you can find sources that justify maintaining a list that only goes up to 2021, I will reverse my deletion request and instead start a move request. ―Howard • 🌽33 05:35, 14 May 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.
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 Phoebe (moon)#Named features. ✗plicit 23:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leto Regio

Leto Regio (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 RS's found and fails

WP:NASTRO. Proposing to redirect article with Phoebe (moon)#Named features. ArkHyena (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Redirect per nom SevenSpheres (talk) 22:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. User:Hamterous1 (discuss anything!🐹✈️) 01:52, 14 May 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.
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 Travel Town Museum. Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Pacific 1273

Southern Pacific 1273 (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 cannot find any secondary sources covering this locomotive. Could be redirected to Travel Town Museum or deleted. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have more than one Redirect target article proposed here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to the Travel Town Museum is fine, it's associated with the museum. Oaktree b (talk) 22:19, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lawrence G. Costanzo

AfDs for this article:
Lawrence G. Costanzo (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 notability under the

WP:SIGCOV. Article survived a 2007 AfD but notability thresholds can change. Let'srun (talk) 21:49, 12 May 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.
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! 04:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Se-lib

Se-lib (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)

Open source library without secondary coverage. BrigadierG (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain further? What do you mean by secondary coverage? Can you give an example? Mudcap (talk) 21:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Essentially, all 5 criterion set out at
WP:NSOFTWARE. BrigadierG (talk) 21:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
WP:SECONDARY explains secondary sources. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 21:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Have added references from additional sources independent of the subject. Included explanations that the library was funded for development, is used regularly in the classroom in multiple classes, on research projects, and is the subject professional training venues. I could add more instances. These should all qualify. Thank you for the improvement suggestions. Mudcap (talk) 02:09, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, none of the sources in the article seem to be independent. For example, this tutorial was taught by a lead developer of the library. Coverage from the organization funding the project is not independent either. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it was taught be a developer, but the tutorial was sponsored by the independent International Council of Systems Engineers, San Diego Chapter. They decided to run the tutorial for the sake of its members, spend resources for it, and it is the listed on their website. Doesn't that qualify as independent? Thanks. Mudcap (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately not -
WP:IIS BrigadierG (talk) 19:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Any of the sources used aren't reliable or are passing mentions; I don't find anything extra about this software package, other than where to download it. Oaktree b (talk) 22:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 03:52, 13 May 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.
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 Mary Higgins Clark#Selected television adaptations. No one argued to keep. When in doubt, go with the half who say to redirect without receiving objections. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 03:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try to Remember (film)

Try to Remember (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)

Fails

WP:NFILM; no sources. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 21:45, 12 May 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.
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. ✗plicit 23:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Kali Troy

Kali Troy (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:NBIO; no sources. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 21:42, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wekiva Presbyterian Church

Wekiva Presbyterian Church (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:NORG; no sources; written like an advertisement. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 21:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete If it were verifiable (as stated in article) that this church's webcast truly was the first ever/longest running, that would be notable, but the only source for this claim is a former pastor's personal blog. No other evidence of notability for this church. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: there doesn't seem to be any independent coverage at all online. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:46, 15 May 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.
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. ✗plicit 23:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Battle of Cape Verde

Battle of Cape Verde (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)

Non-notable battle. The article is comprised of mostly LLM slop, and extrapolates fake/conflicting info from a real but minor skirmish (mentioned on page 159 of the source listed). – Hilst [talk] 20:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Clear LLM work which is mostly
neutral point of view violations (states that the battle "highlights the bravery and resilience of those involved in defending against piracy", the article also claims that the battle is "a testament to the challenges faced by maritime trade during the early 18th century."). While the discussed battle happened, its almost certainly unnotable. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:30, 16 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clermont Sans Fil

Clermont Sans Fil (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 indication this was ever notable and completely

WP:UNSOURCED but given I don't know French, decided to AfD instead of PROD out of an abundance of caution. Allan Nonymous (talk) 22:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 09:27, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 20:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Various websites mention Clermont-Ferrand, but nothing found about this wifi initiative. What's used for sourcing isn't enough, basically profiles of the org. Oaktree b (talk) 22:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "sources" listed as references appear to be republished pr items by the group itself, or various blog items. Oaktree b (talk) 22:31, 12 May 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.
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. ✗plicit 23:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Ruben Riccioli

Ruben Riccioli (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)

Poorly sourced rugby BLP with no evidence of notability. Fails

WP:SPORTCRIT due to lack of in-depth coverage available online. All I found was routine transfer news (1, 2). JTtheOG (talk) 20:15, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. ✗plicit 23:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Property Shop

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

Article about a television show, not

primary sourcing that this was formerly based on with one newspaper article about the show, but other than that one source I only found glancing namechecks of its existence in coverage of other things, such as other similar TV shows about other people and Tatiana Londono's later career ups and downs after this show ended, which might support a BLP of her as a person but doesn't establish the notability of this show as a show. Bearcat (talk) 20:09, 12 May 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.
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 procedural keep‎. No rationale for deletion present.

(non-admin closure) BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Nadine Rohr

Nadine Rohr (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 any reliable source on the subject. Fails

WP:SPORTBASIC
Shinadamina (talk) 19:10, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 03:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revaz Gigauri

Revaz Gigauri (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 should have at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage, excluding database sources.Does not pass

WP:SPORTBASIC
Shinadamina (talk) 18:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, I have added the rationale now. Shinadamina (talk) 08:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Two World Cups and a simple search is bringing up GNG passing sourcing such as this and there will likely be more offline. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep You can improve the article too. Orientls (talk) 14:42, 14 May 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.
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. Complex/Rational 20:16, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Shahid Siddiqui (politician)

Shahid Siddiqui (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)

Fails

WP:GNG. Never held any political office that makes them inherently notable. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:24, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 16:28, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takuro Okuyama

Takuro Okuyama (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)

Yet another really poorly sourced BLP on a footballer that only played 46 mins of football. Japanese Wikipedia has no decent sources. He is mentioned 3 times in this blog post and once in Reds Denk but this is far from enough for

WP:GNG. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete, unnotable insignificant footballer without decent sourcing. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:20, 16 May 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.
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! 16:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Kota Yanagisawa

Kota Yanagisawa (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)

Similar case to

WP:SPORTBASIC and SIGCOV require multiple good sources for a pass. Japanese Wikipedia doesn't have any acceptable sources. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:13, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 16:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yasuhiro Tanaka (footballer)

Yasuhiro Tanaka (footballer) (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)

Unacceptable sourcing on a BLP for a footballer that played in 1 cup game then disappeared, although he was briefly on the books for

WP:SIGCOV. Similar case to Yuki Toma and Kei Hirata, which were created by the same editor. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 16:56, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 16:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shotaro Dei

Shotaro Dei (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)

Unacceptable sourcing on a BLP for a footballer that played in one 2nd tier match and then disappeared to the amateur levels. Searching in Japanese, I can only find a couple of self-published blog posts like La Bola and LiveDoor, which are not considered to be

WP:SIGCOV. Similar case to Yuki Toma and Kei Hirata, which were created by the same editor. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 16:44, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 16:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shoji Yamada

Shoji Yamada (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)

Unacceptable sourcing on a BLP for a footballer that played in 2 cup games then disappeared. Searching in Japanese, I can only find coverage of the musician of the same name. I've had a look at Japanese Wikipedia but none of the sources there show

WP:SIGCOV. Similar case to Yuki Toma and Kei Hirata, which were created by the same editor. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 16:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

CuteDolphin712 in fairness, Japanese Wikipedia articles for footballers tend to be of a very high quality in my experience so it tends to be a good indicator on whether the en.wiki article is worth having. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:31, 13 May 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.
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! 16:32, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Radio UTD

Radio UTD (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)

Notability issues and a number of references don't link to anywhere useful. Okmrman (talk) 15:43, 12 May 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.
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! 16:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Bogey Awards

Bogey Awards (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)

Non-notable award with virtually zero independent significant coverage beyond this brief piece on the website of the

Golden Globes. Sgubaldo (talk) 15:36, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Google search can lead an editor to sources that might prove to be reliable but Google search results alone don't establish notability. There are a lot of subjects that people search for or write about that don't meet Wikipedia's standards for notability. Liz Read! Talk! 16:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Habibullah Khan Swati II

Habibullah Khan Swati II (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)

Clearly fails WP:NPOLITICIAN and a quick Google search doesn't yield anything either which can help meet WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - Appears to be an

WP:NON-SIGCOV. Google search also doesn't provide anything substantial.Sameeerrr (talk) 11:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC) (Nota bene Blocked sockpuppet)[reply
]

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

The result was a SNOW keep‎.

(non-admin closure) Aaron Liu (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Blockout 2024

Blockout 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)

Not relevant, random TikTok trend { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 13:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep ongoing trend/news event, but already documented by entertainment and non-entertainment websites. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep pretty ridiculous to vote for the deletion of a massive protest movement that significantly impacted the social media presence of dozens of celebrities. Especially considering a political climate that refuses to acknowledge the protests as legitimate and actively contributes to censuring folks who participate. Should #MeToo have been considered a random twitter hashtag? <IP removed> 19:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Meets
WP:GNG. S5A-0043Talk 11:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Keep it covers a relevant protest movement linked to a conflict that is redefining the whole international system. 185.120.125.4 (talk) 01:26, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is notable and reliably sourced. WC gudang inspirasi (Read! Talk!) 03:37, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Topic properly covered in the media. I would also suggest the nomination be withdrawn. Hogo-2020 (talk) 08:46, 16 May 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.
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! 16:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Ibrahim Osman Afrah

Ibrahim Osman Afrah (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)

Standard BEFORE seems to have found nothing about the guy? Definitely nothing suitable for a BLP, which their own works (as currently cited) are not. Not for the whole article anyway. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Somalia. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Poetry. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, unless someone finds something in Somali or with a different spelling of his name that I've missed. Fails
    WP:CREATIVE... this looks like an autobiography to me, because there is nothing in any of the cited sources that confirms the subject's background, birth date, or height, and the photos are either taken from the subject's social media or the article creator claims them as his own work. Richard3120 (talk) 21:58, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Daystar Television Network stations. Liz Read! Talk! 16:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WXNY-LD

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

Fails

WP:GNG; just two sources; could merge into List of Daystar Television Network stations. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 13:10, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. Liz Read! Talk! 16:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brenda Jean Patrick

AfDs for this article:
Brenda Jean Patrick (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)

(Renomination: the discussion from 2010 closed as "no consensus.") I don't believe that Brenda Jean Patrick fulfills the notability requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. She is (was? I think I found an obituary) an educational consultant who touted the idea of "customer care" in school districts. Most of the information I can find about her consultant work is in the form of press releases in local papers when she held workshops for a district. I don't see independent coverage outside of her PR. Joyous! Noise! 17:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:01, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Mojo Hand (talk) 14:19, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-Greek wars

Indo-Greek wars (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 is a mess; it consists largely of unattributed copy-pastes from other articles, and purports to present a topic, the 'Indo-Greek wars', that is in reality a sequence of isolated and unrelated conflicts between different polities at different times. Alexander's campaigns take up half the article, but the other conflicts, which took place decades or centuries later, are dealt with far too briefly, and no attempt is made to weave all of this into a coherent narrative (which in itself is evidence this is an artificial topic). THe very name itself is scarcely used anywhere (cf. Gbooks). Constantine ✍ 11:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Problematic editor who created a number of very poorly written articles. Qcne (talk) 12:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete On its face, it appears to both duplicate other article content and be an inappropriate synthesis. And, on the offchance it is notable and just not written about in English language sources,
WP:TNT GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 16:42, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ekene Emigo

Ekene Emigo (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)

Another creation by Zombie with a lot of dubious info; I can find nothing to verify the move to Leicester City nor the 1 cap for Nigeria. This hasn't always been unsourced. It's previously had the unreliable

WP:SIGCOV. This article has existed for 16 years without a decent source so, if we can't find one, it needs deleting. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:42, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ignatius Ekwunife

Ignatius Ekwunife (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)

Another poorly sourced BLP by a banned editor, see User talk:Zombie433 for more examples of these. The only sources found are All Africa 1, a paywalled source that says Ugochukwu Nwankwo, Diri Otimoti and Ebitimi Agogo will run the midfield and Teddy Lucky, Ignatius Ekwunife and Amakiri George in the fore. and All Africa 2, which says The goal disorganised Sharks the more and three bookings to Ignatius Ekwunife, Festus Umasah and Chidiekeke Okefe in a spate of five minutes

These are both passing mentions in a match report and do not constitute

WP:SIGCOV. I am unable to verify anything else from this stub and, even if I could, notability is still a big issue. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:29, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olatunji Adeola

Olatunji Adeola (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)

One of many dubious BLPs created by the same permanently banned user, see

WP:GNG. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:05, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WLAS-LP (Florida)

WLAS-LP (Florida) (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)

Zero secondary sources, lacking in-depth coverage. Fails

WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 11:05, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abhijit Das Bobby

Abhijit Das Bobby (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:GNG. Subject was never elected to any political office that can make them inherently notable, and article relies majorly on sources that do not satisfy SIGCOV and INDEPENDENT, hence, fails GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:47, 12 May 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.
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. ✗plicit 11:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

National Society Sons of the American Colonists

National Society Sons of the American Colonists (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)

Could not find any independent, reliable sources covering this group. Toadspike (talk) 10:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing comes up in a
WP:BEFORE search and article cites only the subject's own sources. Notability is not WP:INHERITED from National Society Daughters of the American Colonists. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:59, 13 May 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.
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. ✗plicit 11:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Dartmouth Dodecaphonics

Dartmouth Dodecaphonics (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 significant coverage found. Toadspike (talk) 09:58, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 03:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seekda

AfDs for this article:
Seekda (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 independent reliable sources about this niche software company in the article, and I am seeing nothing in a search that is not promotional. BD2412 T 00:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Fails GNG obviously. 🥒
    🔔) 02:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
]
I think by your own analysis of the first source it is a mention. The paper is not about Seekda. "Compared with the alternative system......" indicates it is simply being compared to the main topic of the paper and not about Seekda itself. And the fact the name is used 20 times also has no bearing. Curious if you were able to access the entire paper or just the abstract? --CNMall41 (talk) 07:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have full access to all of the sources I listed here.
general notability guideline with a stronger emphasis on quality of the sources to prevent gaming of the rules by marketing and public relations professionals.

Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline says:

"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.

There is no requirement for Seekda to be "the main topic of the source material". Covering "the topic directly and in detail" (which these sources do) is sufficient to meet the notability guideline.

Cunard (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

It would have been helpful to note when first presenting the sources that the discussion of the subject went beyond the content quoted. I am more on the fence with that information. It would also be nice to see some of this added to the article. BD2412 T 13:12, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BD2412 (talk · contribs), I usually do not note that because the full text is usually available to all editors. The full text is not available to all editors for any of these sources, so I will take that feedback into consideration for these kinds of sources. I am hesitant to rewrite an article at AfD as it would be a time waste if the article was still deleted. I've rewritten the article here, however, in the hope that it demonstrates the subject is notable and moves you off the fence in supporting retention. Cunard (talk) 09:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@
Greenish Pickle!: What do you think? BD2412 T 15:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Comment: Here are two additional sources about the subject:
    1. Simperl, Elena; Cuel, Roberta; Stein, Martin (2013). "Case Study: Building a Community of Practice Around Web Service Management and Annotation". Incentive-Centric Semantic Web Application Engineering. Cham:
      doi:10.1109/MIC.2009.135.

      The article notes: "To be really useful, an open Web service would be able to be discovered easily by some easy-to-use search engine, perhaps Seekda (http://seekda.com). Now, this is potentially a good tool. Try, for example, searching for “hotel reservation.” You get a list of WSDL services. Click on one and you get the list of operations of the service. Click on one of those, and it asks you to fill in the strings that will compose the message and be sent to the service. This is almost practical. Except you don’t have a clue what you’re being asked to enter. Click, for example, on the “ReservationsService,” which is one of the services returned in the search. Oh, wait, there’s no description yet. Well, just pick the first one in the results list. Its description is “seems to be an internal service.” And if you click on the “Use Now” link, you have no idea what the operations do, individually or together. If you click on one of them, you’re asked to enter strings that correspond to fields that clearly want you to enter some secret codes. Even the previous “ReservationService” has operations with names like “GetRGInfo” with a single message field called “nRGID.” Seekda is possibly the best product of this kind out there. But you see the problem, don’t you?"

    Cunard (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
I understand what you are saying, but I still do not agree. You are pointing to GNG for some of your contention and NCORP for others. Under GNG, "There is no requirement for Seekda to be "the main topic of the source material". Covering "the topic directly and in detail" (which these sources do) is sufficient to meet the notability guideline." However, under NCORP, there IS a requirement. It is spelled out in
WP:ORGCRIT and unfortunately I do not see these meeting that criteria. It likely had a great product for a brief period of time but "presumed" notable and actual notable are not the same. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
secondary source; primary and tertiary sources do not count towards establishing notability. These sources "addres[s] the subject of the article directly and in depth". The guideline does not say Seekda must be "the main topic of the source material".

Cunard (talk) 09:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

I am very family with what the guideline says. I feel your definition of what constitutes
WP:CORPDEPTH is not consistent with how others apply it. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@CNMall41: You said:
Under GNG, "There is no requirement for Seekda to be "the main topic of the source material". [...] However, under NCORP, there IS a requirement. It is spelled out in WP:ORGCRIT
I am not seeing anything in ORGCRIT, or NCORP more broadly, that requires a prospective source to cover a company as "the main topic of the source material", as opposed to "directly and in depth". Please point me to the specific text you believe sets this requirement. – Teratix ₵ 11:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bad choice of words on my part. I will admit that as it does not literally say that. I am going off what it says here "Sources that describe only a specific topic related to an organization should not be regarded as providing significant coverage of that organization. Therefore, for example, an article on a product recall or a biography of a CEO is a significant coverage for the Wikipedia article on the product or the CEO, but not a significant coverage on the company (unless the article or biography devotes significant attention to the company itself)" - I take that (and it has been fairly consistent in NCORP AfD discussions) to mean the company must be the main topic.--CNMall41 (talk) 22:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But your own quotation specifies an exception if the article or biography devotes significant attention to the company itself – NCORP, far from requiring something must be "the main topic" of the article in question, explicitly notes the opposite: an article with a different main topic still demonstrates notability if it devotes "significant attention" to the topic under scrutiny. – Teratix ₵ 04:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be helpful to get new opinions of the rewritten article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is assuming the software is notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's been more than adequately demonstrated by the sources. – Teratix ₵ 04:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Still no consensus in sight.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Thank you for the insightful analysis, Teratix (talk · contribs)! As you've suggested, I've modified the lead to focus on on "Seekda" the search engine service, rather than "Seekda" the company. Cunard (talk) 10:08, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep per

(non-admin closure) Remsense诉 08:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Early life of Mao Zedong

Early life of Mao Zedong (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)

Except for Mao Zedong, no other celebrity has his early life clearly written in the main article and has to open a separate article Coddlebean (talk) 09:26, 12 May 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.
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 Userify‎. There was agreement that the article should be removed from mainspace, but consensus formed around making selections from the article available to Teratix (talk · contribs) for incorporation into his analytics article. I have moved the article to User:Teratix/AFL_Tables, please drop a line on my talk page when you wish it to be deleted. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 03:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC) Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 03:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFL Tables

AFL Tables (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 GNG and

WP:WEBCRIT. A search for "AFL Tables" will show up thousands of webpages which reference statistics from this online database, but no references which actually give significant coverage about the database as a subject, which is the benchmark which must be met under WEBCRIT. Google searching "paul jeffs afl tables" is a better search term to look for SIGCOV about the database (since any genuine SIGCOV would include Jeffs' name as the site's creator), and the best that shows up a few appreciative one-liner posts in public forums and on other stats databases - nothing which meets GNG's requirements of significance and independence. I don't see any valid alternative to deletion; there's no merge or redirect target that makes sense, and issue of lack of references can't reasonably be solved by draftifying. Aspirex (talk) 00:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

[...] there are also a few publicly curated databases, the best of which is the brilliant AFL Tables maintained by Paul Jeffs. Jeffs' database includes, among other information, results from every AFL/VFL match since 1897, detailed player statistics dating back to 1965, and round-by-round Brownlow voting records from 1984 onwards. "It's a nice dataset, I can say that," said Dr Lenten. "It gives me good bang for my buck because it's possible to look at a number of problems."
(Aside: Footballistics; amazing book, excellent source of information on modern Australian football. Doesn't have a fucking index. I had to skim through all 362 pages to find that paragraph the first time.)
As to what should happen to the article... I agree it probably doesn't meet the GNG. That paragraph's not enough. I also agree there's no mainspace target for redirection or a merger. But I think an article on Australian rules football analytics ("statistics"? I'm still undecided) would be an obvious place to briefly discuss AFL Tables. So, uh, this may be a bit unorthodox, but how would we feel about merging it to my draft? I would be happy to move it into draftspace proper if Gibbsyspin preferred. – Teratix ₵ 12:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would work. It would need to be its own fairly standalone subsection within the analytics article, to ensure that the thousands of wikilinks which may be put in article reflists are directed somewhere specific rather than to a general analytics page. As long as that's achievable, I think that's a valid option. Aspirex (talk) 15:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete with a view to creating a redirect to the statistics article once Teratix has moved their draft to mainspace (or it is otherwise created). It is regrettable that such an important RS doesn't meet GNG or WEBCRIT but there is simply no SIGCOV. Aspirex - I think a Template:Anchor would do the trick. And there are ~12,000 transclusions of Template:AFL Tables that could conceivably link there!
Triptothecottage (talk) 04:26, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:11, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify so that Teratix is able to access the material and merge it into his draft. TarnishedPathtalk 08:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy per TarnishedPath. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:17, 19 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Ultraman Taiga characters. Owen× ☎ 15:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ultraman Tregear

Ultraman Tregear (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)

Most of it were just primary sources. Fails WP:GNG. AfD'ing it to end the edit war. 🥒

🔔) 22:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Reject: you have no reason to delete this article!! Harimua Thailand (talk) 02:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why not? 2605:B40:13E7:F600:1566:1FAC:A05C:22B9 (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@
King Dedede have been redirected for this reason. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Except King Dedede is a different topic entirely and have some decent sources unlike this one (Full of primary sources).The Worst part is, there are other 3 Ultraman articles that are all sourced as primary. 🥒
🔔) 00:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
I know that, I was using him as an example of how notability is not popularity or being a well-liked character. The fact that he is in a better position than this character helps my point. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There is literally no reception in reliable sources either in this article or on the web, so it does not meet GNG. If there is a good redirect target available, redirect it there. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:33, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Reject: Redirect is not allowed and the article must be keep!! Harimua Thailand (talk) 04:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Why? 2605:B40:13E7:F600:6938:8399:70DC:2892 (talk) 14:38, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You made the article, you have serious bias
    Talk 00:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @Harimua Thailand: You can only make 1 bolded vote per AFD. If you want to make another one, you must strike the old one. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    By the way, I am fine with a redirect. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are people allowed to vote twice? Cooper (talk) 01:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, they are not. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not wish to cast votes, but if the consensus brings to delete, I would like to suggest an alternative by redirecting Ultraman Tregear to List of Ultraman Taiga characters. I can compress and salvage whatever remains from this page to their appropriate articles. Zero stylinx (talk) 01:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: What do editors think of the suggestion of redirection? Please remember not to bludgeon an AFD discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:53, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Still no consensus after the previous two.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or Redirect to
    WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth from neutral non-promotional reliable sources addressing the subject directly and indepth. BEFORE including a search for ウルトラマントレギア found primary sources, name mentions, nothing meeting SIGCOV, from independent reliable sources. Keep votes are depending on name mentions and primary sources neither of which show notability.  // Timothy :: talk  17:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Redirect to List of Ultraman Taiga characters or similar target. There is insufficient sourcing here, and the Tokusatsu Network does not appear to me to be a reliable source (see [10]). However, redirection is an entirely appropriate, and indeed, preferred alternative to deletion. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 03:10, 20 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎.

(non-admin closure) Let'srun (talk) 15:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Silesia national football team

Silesia national football team (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)

Silesia is not a country, so it cannot be this. Rename it--but to what? There's no Frisian national football team or Walloon national football team either. Plus, the article is little more than a directory and a list of matches. Drmies (talk) 21:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Czech Republic, Germany, and Poland. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, should certainly be trimmed / improved / sourced, whole sections could go, but it seems a bit unfair to single out this team, as it is only one of a long list here, and while I realise it's not a real guide to notability, the fact that it has 9 language versions at least show there's some passing interest beyond its homeland and has some historical significance. It's pretty niche stuff, but a lot of others in that list are too and it may be more logical to start from the most obscure and work up, don't want to insult anyone's region but Seborga national football team looks an example of one with far less merit for inclusion than Silesia.
The name is a topic that's come up previously, particularly relating to the more prominent non-nations like Catalonia. Personally I would have no problem with it being something like 'representative football team' for all of these, but it's been argued that there are quite a few non-sovereign FIFA teams so the word 'national' is really just used to differentiate them from clubs and does not necessarily infer a certain status on the territory in question.
Only other thing is, do Wallonia and Frisia have any sort of combined team that plays matches? That's not meant to be a 'well do they???' question, I'm genuinely not sure, but I couldn't see one on French or Dutch wiki where one might expect to find something snuck away. If they have never had such a team, it's not really fair to compare their non-presence to articles for teams that have demonstrably played matches, even if really long ago and/or at a very low level. Crowsus (talk) 22:38, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep could be improved, but the topic is notable - can easily tell by looking at German and Polish language articles, though the Polish one is under sourced by English standards. SportingFlyer T·C 06:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Per above. Although it has notp played many matches it is a represnetative team that is a topic of interest. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 07:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep, per SportingFlyer and several others. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:34, 17 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2027 Gujarat Legislative Assembly election

2027 Gujarat Legislative Assembly election (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:RS are currently talking about it. Should be recreated closer to 2027 when we have actual sources discussing the election. Soni (talk) 07:39, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Anyone is free to create a redirect if they see it fit. ✗plicit 11:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2027 Goa Legislative Assembly election

2027 Goa Legislative Assembly election (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:RS
are currently talking about it. Should be recreated closer to 2027 when we have actual sources discussing the election.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2028 Democratic Party presidential primaries for a similar recent AFD Soni (talk) 07:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have now noticed a series of articles under the Template:Next Indian elections. I was not aware of the remaining articles, and the standard to call them "Next". I'm not now unsure if there's a broader consensus at play; if not, one should be established. Either will make deleting all early "Next articles" easier, or we could add talk page notes to not nominate any of them for deletion. Soni (talk) 07:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since the template also got tagged for deletion separately, here's all the next election articles from the template; these may need revisiting if this AFD closes as Delete - Next Assam Legislative Assembly election, Next Kerala Legislative Assembly election, Next Manipur Legislative Assembly election, Next Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, Next West Bengal Legislative Assembly election
The articles this probably does not affect are -
Next Bihar Legislative Assembly election and Next Delhi Legislative Assembly election (probably in 2025), Next Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly election (probably in 2026). All of them already have RS discussing them Soni (talk) 12:29, 17 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. ✗plicit 03:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of constituencies of Gujarat

List of constituencies of Gujarat (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 is no specific list for the parliamentary constituencies in Gujarat, only the list for the legislative assembly constituencies in Gujarat exists. Thus disambiguation page is not needed. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 04:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:28, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Security Shield

Security Shield (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)

Run-of-the-mill malware with no evidence of notability. PROD previously contested by the now-banned Neelix with "try Google News search" - I did, and I found either nothing or unrelated topics * Pppery * it has begun... 14:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Logs: 2013-02 ✗
A7
--
talk) 00:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as it's been PROD'd. Not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:17, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Only information found was user-generated content; other hits were irrelevant (e.g. Spectrum's security service, which goes by the same name). WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 19:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: There seem to be some newer software packages that use this name, but there is nothing about this particular incarnation. I can't see anything we'd use, even what's now used for sourcing are mentions only. Oaktree b (talk) 22:37, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:47, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimate Defender

Ultimate 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)

Run-of-the-mill malware with no evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 15:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Logs: 2007-01 ✗
PROD
--
talk) 00:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I only see how-to remove guides and forum posts on goods. Doesn't meet
WP:GNG in any shape or form. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 17:44, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HijackThis

AfDs for this article:
HijackThis (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)

Reliant entirely on primary sources. No evidence of notability. Previous AfD was kept due to people sharing their own testimonials of how it helped them, which is just not how notability works. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Previous discussions: 2006-11 (closed as ✓ Keep)
Related discussions: 2010-08 Merijn Bellekom (closed as redirect to HijackThis) ← 2006-12 Wssecure (closed as ✗ delete) ← 2005-07 Help2Go Detective (closed as MERGE and REDIRECT)
Logs: 2005-03 ✗ deleted ← 2005-03 ✗ deleted ← 2005-01 ✗ deleted ← 2005-01 ✗ deleted ← 2005-01 ✗ deleted ← 2005-01 ✗ deleted
--
talk) 00:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:19, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: has had clear historical significance and has been site of lots of reviews (passes
WP:NSOFT criterion 3): [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 17:58, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 02:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anumta Qureshi

AfDs for this article:
Anumta Qureshi (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 subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one WP:Inherent notability. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 16:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Lollywood newbie Anumta Qureshi lights up internet with new bold photos". 24 News HD. July 29, 2022.
  • Could you share some reputable sources that can confirm she held significant roles? I'd prefer not to rely on sources known for publishing sensational clickbait to garner traffic. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 08:41, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*::information Note: The creator of this BLP @BeauSuzanne is suspected UPE and a SPI is underway . —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:33, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Enough, Saqib. More of this casting aspersions will result in a block. Liz Read! Talk! 07:26, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Liz, I've retracted my comment. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Liz, I think Saqib did this in response to one of my comments, so I apologize for any role I had in provoking this. I've replied to him clarifying what my advice was (i.e. talk more generally, and don't single out editors). Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: BLP, fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in the article are name mentions, promo, interviews, nothing meeting WP:SIRS, BEFORE found similar, nothing meeting WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth meeting SIGCOV. BLPs require strong sourcing.  // Timothy :: talk  13:18, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, while I was here, I took a look at this article and the sourcing is... poor... to put it lightly. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:17, 15 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mutta (tribe)

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

I couldn't find sources to show notability - I am aware this isn't my area though or language. Boleyn (talk) 09:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, Pakistan, India, and Punjab. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: 5 results show up if you search "Mutta people" on Google Books. [17] They do exist, but maybe they are a small community (I don't know) and not much has been written about them. However, I found 5 results on Google books alone. I haven't checked other venues like Scholar etc. If this is a keep, maybe changing it to Mutta people.Tamsier (talk) 11:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 18:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the Mutta tribe definitely exists, i've been able to find some mentions of them on JSTOR and Google Scholar. Samoht27 (talk) 23:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:27, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. No sources on the page and a simple search did not show result on a Mutta tribe. I did find a Google book that talks about Muttadari System of Bhagatha tribe but that is different than the tribe on the page. Some more sources about Muttas in Australia. I did not find any source that would give an option to draftify the page for improvement. Fails
    WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 12:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete doesn't pass general notability guidelines. Based Kashmiri TALK 10:06, 19 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎.

WP:NPASR applies. ✗plicit 11:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Vida Loka II

Vida Loka II (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)

Non-notable song, fails

WP:NSONG. No in-depth coverage in secondary sources. Binksternet (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:23, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. No other editors agree with the Delete analysis of the sources, that they are MILL covererage. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 03:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WGBS-LD

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Virginia. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is some sourcing which I have added, all from the 1994–98 period. They were on local cable and got coverage from that. Once Cox dropped them, they really drop off in local coverage. I could go either way. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, The new sources seem to be enough to say that it at the very least was notable enough in it’s early history to justify keeping it, but due to it being from a very specific point, I’m have to keep it at semi-weak. Danubeball (talk) 20:17, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After thinking about it, I decided to say that this station probably does have the coverage to continue being on Wikipedia. Danubeball (talk) 01:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source eval:
Comments Source
Technical data, fails WP:SIRS 1. "Facility Technical Data for WGBS-LD". Licensing and Management System. Federal Communications Commission.
Mill news about new programming, fails WP:SIRS 2. ^ Harville, Bobbie (November 10, 1994). "Inspirational TV: Genesis TV 7 brings new line of family shows". Daily Press. Newport News, Virginia. p. Y6. Retrieved April 22, 2024 – via Newspapers.com.
Mill news about station changing signal 3. ^ Knemeyer, Nelda L. (April 27, 1995). "Genesis TV7 changing signal, adding new markets". Daily Press. Newport News, Virginia. p. N7. Retrieved April 22, 2024 – via Newspapers.com.
Mill news about station struggles 4. ^ Jump up to:a b Nicholson, David (May 14, 1998). "Station strruggling [sic] to stay on cable lineup: Hampton owners confer with NAACP". Daily Press. Newport News, Virginia. p. C4. Retrieved April 22, 2024 – via Newspapers.com.
Mill news about lineup change 5. ^ Nicholson, David (October 10, 1998). "WPEN burned by Cox decision to change lineup". Daily Press. Newport News, Virginia. p. D1. Retrieved April 22, 2024 – via Newspapers.com.
FCC database record 6. ^ "Transfers #170659". Licensing and Management System. Federal Communications Commission. November 22, 2021.
Database record, fails WP:SIRS 7. ^ RabbitEars TV Query for WGBS
 // Timothy :: talk  18:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. I understand that the article may well never grow much beyond where it is now, but I do think that sources 3-5 are sufficient squeak by on significant coverage, which I think was the only issue here. I disagree that these are promo/ad pieces; they read as normal coverage of a regional station to me. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 02:35, 20 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. I'm sorry but we need policy-based reasons to consider when deciding whether to Keep or Delete an article. Liz Read! Talk! 04:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

K. K. Kabobo

K. K. Kabobo (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:BIO1E. It’s all about his death and nothing else. Nothing to establish notability on this one. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Kindly keep this article.The reason is because this person was very notable when he was living, its unfortunate that little information has been written about him in the internet era, but he is really notable in Ghana, his death is not the reason why we have much publication about him, but rather it's his contributions he made to the Ghanaian music industry,kindly keep the article as we continue to make improvement to the article.08:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC) Jwale2 (talk) 08:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:19, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. ✗plicit 03:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bader Pretorius

Bader Pretorius (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

WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 01:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not seeing enough sustained coverage to justify GNG, including in the links above. JoelleJay (talk) 21:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:27, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I am satisfied the subject meets SPORTSPERSON with at least one article which directly details the subject (Rugbyfan22's news24.com source). The rest, while all routine sports business coverage (rosters, games), supports notability. This is WAAY more sourcing than most sportspeople I come across in these processes. BusterD (talk) 14:15, 14 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Institute of IT Training

AfDs for this article:
Institute of IT Training (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:G11 despite having 63 revisions over 14 years. Mz7 (talk) 07:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete per nom. A09|(talk) 10:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Sourcing is insufficient. Reads like an ad article. Cortador (talk) 17:16, 12 May 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.
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 Revolutionary Government of the Armed Forces of Peru. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 04:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ENAPU

ENAPU (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)

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. Article on a small company formed in 1970 with just "it exists" type info. North8000 (talk) 13:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening, I am currently unable to review this nomination individually, but in the event that the deadline passes before I am able to do so, I would like to request that the page be redirected to Revolutionary Government of the Armed Forces of Peru as a section which includes enough coverage of this and similar entities can be created. AlejandroFC (talk) 20:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: The best I can find are company listings and PR items on this site [18], none of which help notability. I don't find coverage in RS. Oaktree b (talk) 22:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sourcing in the Spanish wiki article is a government website and a history of marine transport in Peru, but that's not enough. Oaktree b (talk) 22:42, 12 May 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.
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 Metropolitano (Lima). Liz Read! Talk! 03:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jirón de la Unión (Metropolitano)

Jirón de la Unión (Metropolitano) (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 bus stop is not notable. The sources only give passing coverage at best. Should be redirected to Metropolitano (Lima). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:20, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. While this is certainly not a policy-based reason to delete, just take a look at the photo of the stop in the infobox--it should be obvious that this is not a notable stop in and of itself. No real sources to be found, and the eswiki article doesn't provide any helpful sources, either. The street itself, however, does appear to be notable (the street is what's covered in most of the sources if you do a search), and that could also be a possible redirect/(small) merge target. Bestagon ⬡ 01:15, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect or delete
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have no objection to a redirect per OP. Bestagon ⬡ 10:17, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus‎. This has already gotten relisted twice to generate more discussion and clear consensus. No discussion has been generated. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stuart Bell (figure skater)

Stuart Bell (figure skater) (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:NSKATE; ineligible for PROD. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 09:48, 5 May 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, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎.

(non-admin closure) Let'srun (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

AHRC New York City

AHRC New York City (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:BEFORE search. Daask (talk) 09:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as meeting
WP:SIGCOV
. Google scholar yields a number of scholarly sources that are paywalled. In particular, there's a book "State Association for Retarded Children and New York State Government" which is not available online. Archive.org also has a lot of hits but many of them are unavailable for borrowing. I was able to find at least two multi-paragraph treatments of the article subject (plus the Autism one which is brief). It gets a lot of mentions on archive - there's probably more significant coverage out there.
Oblivy (talk) 03:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I have to agree per se especially with this source. Its true that non-profit corps doesn't usually get notable except with PR, etc. (some of them I mean). However, this came from a origin, a history and even if it is one boo that is verifiable, let the article be kept for further improvements. The matter is that
    WP:NEXIST. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 10:46, 18 May 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.
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! 23:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Merge window

Merge window (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)

Essentially a

WP:DICDEF that has been insufficiently sourced for over 8 years, and the only "source" provided is a forum post. If this concept is at all notable, then it can just be a one-sentence mention in software development process. ZimZalaBim talk 14:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 22:49, 12 May 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.
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. ✗plicit 11:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Ernst Stapelberg

Ernst Stapelberg (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. Three sentences here was the best I found. JTtheOG (talk) 07:02, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Since this title hasn't been used before, I find the case for SALTing it to be weak. However, I will keep the page on my watchlist, and act if need. Owen× ☎ 08:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kourage Beatz

Kourage Beatz (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)

First off, this is a hoax. It has been recreated by different accounts and most recently speedy deleted as Tochi Bright Clement by Vanderwaalforces. The sock case of this user is still ongoing here. This should be Deleted and Salt. There's no evidence of notability, the reliable sources listed never mentioned this subject except for the press release sources and user generated sources. @T.C.G. [talk] 05:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly
    Talk to my owner:Online 05:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy per nomination, there's a bit of a backlog at SPI though. db-hoax, db-banned, db-bio, take your pick. Wikishovel (talk) 06:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is there a technical reason why we're discussing this, rather than simply speedying per G5 (etc.) and salting? --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's right! @T.C.G. [talk] 09:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete & salt with extreme prejudice, obvs, by any means necessary speedy or otherwise. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete: There is, by all means, no reason for this to be at AfD at all, lol. It should be a speedy delete and salt. The young man isn’t ready to give up on self-promo. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete. The subject fails
    WP:BADCHART. The Top Naija Music Awards is not a credible award in my opinion.  Versace1608  Wanna Talk? 14:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Yet, it's all fabricated! @T.C.G. [talk] 16:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete and Salt - Note that this article is not a
    exist but that's all he has accomplished for our purposes. All of his media "coverage" is at self-generated platforms, social media, and gullible web services that reprint promo announcements. Someday his relentless self-promotion may kick in somewhere else, but keep us out of it. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @Doomsdayer520, ambiguously, hoaxes also mean spreading false information and that's what I meant. The article contains fabricated claims made by the user like winning an award and producing some notable individuals projects. @T.C.G. [talk] 15:43, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, a good example is the Mars hoax, false information deliberately spread about something quite real. But I'm glad an AFD was created, thinking about it: if it's not speedied, we'll be able to tag future posts on Mr. Beatz-Lonky with db-multiple A7 and G4, rather than waiting for the SPI to get through the queue, or A7 with a hoax tag underneath so some admin has to go through all the references to determine that it's a load of rubbish about someone who exists and was nominated for a minor award. Wikishovel (talk) 16:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    'Mr. Beatz-Lonky' lol. Right on point though. @T.C.G. [talk] 16:26, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Per above. Puffs and PR
    WP:MILL. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 03:36, 17 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge‎ to 2012 New South Wales local elections. I found the Keep (="Oppose") views to be largely not based on P&G. Owen× ☎ 08:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2012 New South Wales mayoral elections

2012 New South Wales mayoral 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)

Fails

WP:NOTDB; including all of the results for all of the mayoral elections would make this page massive. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose Including each mayoral result (about 50 in total) would only make the page about the same size as Results of the 2022 Australian federal election in New South Wales or 2021 New South Wales mayoral elections, hardly "massive" by Wiki standards Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 05:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The
WP:NOTDB territory. That guideline states that "[s]hort, complete lists of every item that is verifiably a member of the group" may be appropriate. However, such lists "should only be created if a complete list is reasonably short (less than 32K)". The list is already 12k of wikitext from 2 entries; 50 entries would far exceed that limit. voorts (talk/contributions) 06:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Oppose Auspol wiki has been notoriously poor at recording local elections despite a wealth of information about them being available, and recording all results would see the page be as large if not smaller than most other auspol results pages. NSW is also the largest state and its mayors are generally very notable & attract a lot of media attention. Goodebening (talk) 05:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The page clearly states how the mayoral elections are part of the local elections, they are notable enough to split the page for results It would be messier to embed these results in the "List of mayors of [LGA]" if they weren't on this page AmNowEurovision (talk) 04:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with
    WP:NPOL, being a mayor does not automatically guarantee notability. TarnishedPathtalk 08:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Oppose, per consistency with other mayoral elections. I don't really see a point in merging this page but keeping all of the other mayoral ones separate. Additionally, this page is clearly large enough to warrant an article in its own right; merging would only make parsing through these articles more tedious. Loytra (talk) 11:01, 16 May 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.
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! 03:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Sean Kenny (rugby league)

Sean Kenny (rugby league) (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)

Poorly sourced rugby BLP. Fails

WP:SPORTCRIT as I am unable to find anything more than routine transactional announcements (1, 2). JTtheOG (talk) 03:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Undecided: Large scope for expansion, but not enough coverage to warrant keeping article in current state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mn1548 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: There are a few more articles on him signing for Salford - Total RL, BBC Sport - basically the same as the Sky Sports article, nothing of note. For Swinton there is very little - this one from March 2017 is as good as it gets: [19], after that just passing mentions or Thatto Heath match reports in the local paper. EdwardUK (talk) 20:51, 15 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gotham, Inc.

Gotham, 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)

Fails

WP:CORP. Found only one independent source with in-depth coverage: https://archives.lib.duke.edu/catalog/gothaminc. Flounder fillet (talk) 03:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:27, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Owen× ☎ 08:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fish market (Nouakchott)

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 Nouakchott fish market, though often highlighted in travel guides covering the city, doesn't possess the sufficient secondary coverage, distinctive traits, or historical importance required for a Wikipedia article. The potential for substantial expansion beyond a rudimentary description is minimal. Mooonswimmer 04:25, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Owen× ☎ 07:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bradford Gowen

Bradford Gowen (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 on the article, only a single promary external link Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 03:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, Maryland, New York, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Profile here in the NY Times [20] and mentions the award/prize won in 1978. I'd say he's notable. Oaktree b (talk) 22:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also appears to be featured in this book, but Gbooks blocks it due to copyright reasons in my country [21] Oaktree b (talk) 22:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: per Oaktree; a profile in one of the US's largest newspapers is pretty damning to me. Queen of Hearts (talk) 00:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. The article is in my opinion poorly written and very poorly cited. But the subject seems notable for their performance career. Needs a serious rewrite, though. Qflib (talk) 18:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- solo recital features in the NYTimes is generally enough for classical music features (it also strongly suggests that there would have been much other coverage in the late 1970s in newspapers and magazines that don't have an easily searchable digital archive). Notability at one point in life is notability over the rest of the subject's life. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:44, 14 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Cars characters. Owen× ☎ 07:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doc Hudson

Doc Hudson (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)

Having a hard time finding any valuable sources about this character per BEFORE. Most of it were just talking about its mysterious death. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 03:09, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. With just a Weak Keep, I think I can close this discussion as Delete. Liz Read! Talk! 02:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rhys Lenarduzzi

Rhys Lenarduzzi (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 rugby player to meet

WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 02:58, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. While the participating editors here might not have addressed the nominator's concern there is a clear consensus to Keep this article and, probably what might be more important, no support at all for deletion of this article. It may not have sources from after 2023 but the participating editors here have concluded that the sources are good enough. If it were more of a borderline situation, I'd relist this discussion again but opinion seems nearly unanimous except for the nominator. Liz Read! Talk! 02:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdan Khmelnitsky Battalion

Bogdan Khmelnitsky Battalion (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:NOTNEWS - no reliable sources covering the article subject after 2023. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 22:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Russia, and Ukraine. Owen× ☎ 23:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep The article needs more work about the unit's actions in 2024. It's lazy to call for a deletion of a page because you don't find sources from a certain year. On that note, the vast majority of the sources from 2023 in this article are considered reliable. Salfanto (talk) 01:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep Important unit of the war in Ukraine. The article is sourced well enough, and the sudject has been covered rather extensively. And if @Manyareasexpert didnt delete several news articles covering the battalion, there would be no reason for nomination. F.Alexsandr (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Greetings, only unreliable sources were deleted. Thanks! ManyAreasExpert (talk) 18:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep Seems notable and important Marcelus (talk) 09:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Many RS to establish notability. FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 May 11. This was NAC-closed as "SNOW" early, despite not meeting the general criteria for SNOW. I encourage the AfD nominator (also the DRV appellant) to reply to some of the 'keep' opinions above, addressing their concerns from a P&G standpoint and discussing SUSTAINED as it may apply here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:11, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Notable unit, enough RS. Florificapis (talk) 02:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Greetings all, thanks for all the votes.
    WP:SUSTAINED. It's not enough for the article to have "good" or "many" RS, the SUSTAINED criteria should be met for the article to exist. Thanks! ManyAreasExpert (talk) 18:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Keep per GNG and
WP:NUNIT, obviously notable, and per above. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 23:43, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
per GNG and
WP:SUSTAINED of GNG. NUNIT covers military units, and if you read article content, all of it is reported "by Russian sources", so it looks more like a media phenomena, not a real military formation. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 20:01, 15 May 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.
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. Complex/Rational 02:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Ukraine Yellow Kitchen Photo

Ukraine Yellow Kitchen Photo (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)

Doubtful

lasting significance. Bedivere (talk) 01:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete as per nomination, cant find any mention of either the photo or the photographer after February 2023. F.Alexsandr (talk) 23:36, 13 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to List of Tonga national rugby union players. Liz Read! Talk! 02:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jethro Felemi

Jethro Felemi (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 Tongan rugby union player, to meet

WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 01:42, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 01:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WNKJ-TV

WNKJ-TV (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)

A recent review of FCC records, available literature, and the Kentucky New Era indicates that WNKJ-TV never broadcast, even though a permit was awarded. The FCC lists the permit as deleted May 7, 1984. We do not maintain articles, except in exceptional circumstances, on TV station permits that were not constructed, which applies to WNKJ-TV and the second attempt at the allocation, WKKT-TV. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:39, 12 May 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.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 01:15, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kadhum Auda

Kadhum Auda (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)

Does not appear to meet

WP:BEFORE
search revealed only similarly trivial mentions/database entries.

As an aside, I believe that this is the first article I have nominated for deletion, so please let me know if I have missed something here. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 01:14, 12 May 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.
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 Delta Goodrem. ✗plicit 01:19, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bunkerdown Sessions

The Bunkerdown Sessions (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)

Does not appear to be notable. Basically just a list of songs performed. This should be a paragraph in Delta Goodrem at most. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:02, 12 May 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2024_May_12&oldid=1225018082"