Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 26

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 Ooberman. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sophia Churney

Sophia Churney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination

)

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage establishing independent notability. It seems that most coverage of the subject is in the context of Ooberman (and to a lesser extent – The Magic Theatre, which is a section of the Ooberman article), a redirect to which would make sense as an alternative to deletion. toweli (talk) 19:39, 26 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, United Kingdom, and England. toweli (talk) 19:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:10, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I don't find any sourcing for this musician, other than streaming sites. Nothing we can use for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Article presents no evidence of independent notability and my searches did not turn up anything. I found this through the academic deletion sorting list but an unsourced stint as a grammar-school teacher obviously isn't going to pass notability that way, either. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Ooberman. Searching ProQuest, I find multiple articles that mention her or have some short discussion of her, but it's all in the context of being a member of the band. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete notability is
  WP:NOTINHERITED and the subject is not notable on her own. Contributor892z (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

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

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. Complex/_Rational 20:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Western education (disambiguation)

Western education (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not a valid disambiguation page, just synonyms of a vague term.

• Note: This discussion has been included in the
  Walsh90210 (talk) 18:26, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  • Delete per nom. --Konanen (talk) 18:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Makes no sense as a disambiguation page.

talk) 19:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:11, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I don't think wikipedia currently has the articles someone would be looking for if they were searching for western education. I can see what the DAB page creator was going for... education about the west from the east, but a language school and European studies doesn't really fit the bill, and European studies... well, it's about the foundations of western culture, but you can't really say Europe is the entirety of the west but rather a subset of it. And a single school that teaches languages is undue weight. An article about Western Education itself might be useful, contrasting with
  WP:SYSTEMIC bias that comes from being written by volunteers who are, themselves, western (myself included). Fieari (talk) 23:34, 27 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!} 21:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lindelwe Zungu

Lindelwe Zungu (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)

Rugby BLP that fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 18:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Looks to fail
  WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:48, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete I found several trivial mentions but no evidence of significant secondary coverage. Contributor892z (talk) 20:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 Zeds Dead. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zachary Rapp-Rovan

Zachary Rapp-Rovan (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 of notability independent of the band

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Bands and musicians, and Canada. Wikishovel (talk) 18:00, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not remove the merge proposal with any intended malice. I am not sure I can properly promote the necessary "proper notability" other than to say that many entertainers have a duality of creative ability other than the one they are most famous for. Given a little time I will endeavor to find more reliable sources to support retention of his BLP. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 03:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Never having experienced an AfD, a redirect sounds like it might be a good solution. Before creating the Rapp-Rovan article, I tried to increase the mention of his graffiti art in the Zeds Dead article but was unsatisfied with the result. A separate BLP seemed to be the answer. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 03:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Zeds Dead. The majority of this article is on that topic. I don't see the sourcing to support a separate article on this band member's graffiti art. Elspea756 (talk) 12:59, 27 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 Euthanasia in the Netherlands. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zoraya ter Beek

Zoraya ter Beek (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 really don't see the purpose of this article. This was a private individual who chose to die under Netherlands long ago passed euthanasia laws. Her death is unlikely to change anything regarding the Netherlands euthanasia policy, and thus does not pass

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disability, Europe, Women and Netherlands. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It's not her death, but her personal process of advocating euthanasia rights that matters. Victomrya (talk) 00:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge (highly selective) into Euthanasia in the Netherlands. Worthy of one sentence there. gidonb (talk) 21:41, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to
  WP:NOTNEWS aspect, there are barely any reliable news sources about ter Beek as well. – Epicgenius (talk) 00:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete as
  WP:BLP1E. No article about her in Dutch Wikipedia, and nothing about her in the their article on Euthanasia in the Netherlands. This looks like "news" planted by the "slippery slope" campaigners against assisted dying: the Guardian says "An article about her case, published in April, was picked up by international media" (published where?) and she says herself that that coverage was "had many inaccuracies and misrepresentations ". She died, legally, end of story. PamD 09:51, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Redirect to
  WP:GNG. Suonii180 (talk) 22:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Redirect to Euthanasia in the Netherlands where she merits a brief mention. Star Mississippi 01:22, 28 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 2022 Florida gubernatorial election. Star Mississippi 16:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karla Hernández-Mats

Karla Hernández-Mats (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)

Prod declined. Subject does not meet

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Florida. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There is a lot of coverage about her as a union leader. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to
  WP:SIRS. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep: The article, as of this comment, contains reliable sources for more than just her selection as lieutenant governor candidate in 2022. GNG is satisfied. Zsinj^Talk 23:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Additional remarks: Arguments for redirect citing the loss of an election do not take into account the published sources that aren’t dated in the fall of 2022. The Axios, WPLG, and CBS Miami sources have sigcov (she isn’t only mentioned once in passing), are independent, and reliable, and they aren’t even related to the election. Then, when you add the numerous articles pertaining to the election, even if the election itself is every four years, she is the main topic and the sources are national, independent, and reliable.

  I will respect the consensus, but would really appreciate being educated on the lack of notability given the cited sources. Zsinj^Talk 23:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Those three you mention are independent, yes, but I don't think they are significant coverage. This Axios piece mentions her only in passing. The WPLG source about the arrest is also not in depth. CBS Miami, one is a video I haven't watched, this one is about the union, not her. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I truly appreciate the reply and clarification. This one was curious to me and I enjoy the opportunity to refine my understanding of sigcov. Zsinj^Talk 12:17, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  My read is that only WPLG could even be considered as sigcov, and that's a stretch given how brief the coverage is. The rest are providing significant coverage of the union she leads, but her notability cannot be

  WP:INHERITED from the union. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  The CBS Miami video is sigcov in my opinion as it’s 10 minutes in duration and she’s one of two primary focuses. Am I misunderstanding the format as it impacts her notability? I have no question about inheriting notability, just seeing sigcov in multiple sources and curious how that isn’t enough for notability. Zsinj^Talk 12:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Arguments for Deletion, to Keep and to Redirect so I'm relisting this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect There's some non-campaign-related coverage of her cited here, but I don't think it's enough to argue she meets GNG. It really just comes down to whether or not you think being interviewed by local news outlets a few times proves that someone is notable. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 22:29, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect As a usual and appropriate outcome for a candidate that loses a statewide election in the United States. I agree with Dclemens1971 and Muboshgu about the state of the existing coverage as not meeting our expectations under GNG. --Enos733 (talk) 03:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to 2022 Florida gubernatorial election: Per se. Most of the article centers here. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:57, 31 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.

KHHB-LP

KHHB-LP (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Hawaii. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 17:00, 19 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!} 17:06, 26 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 WNYX-LD. as an ATD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WNXY-LD

WNXY-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

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and New York. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 13:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with WNYX-LD. WNYX seems to have some sources and common ownership that could be enough to not only justify keeping it from AFD, but the perfect article to merge into. --Danubeball (talk) 23:32, 15 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!} 16:50, 19 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!} 17:03, 26 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.

KJWY-LD

KJWY-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) 16:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Oregon. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 16:37, 19 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!} 17:02, 26 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.

Katokhar, Ambedkar Nagar

Katokhar, Ambedkar Nagar (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)

Found nothing per

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:10, 19 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!} 16:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Place does exist as you can find bank like Union bank of India in this location but no significant coverage can be found in reliable sources for this geographical location to presume it to be notable. RangersRus (talk) 13:44, 28 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.

Bongofari

Bongofari (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)

Apart from lacking sources to

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Bands and musicians, Africa, and Ghana. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:07, 19 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!} 16:55, 26 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 05:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leigh Rogers

Leigh Rogers (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

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and England. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails
  WP:NSKATE Claire 26 (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Subject lacks the needed
  WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 17:49, 30 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. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

YARP

YARP (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)

Contested

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Software. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 15:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Article fails
  WP:PRODUCT. I couldn't find independent reliable sources that would show notability which includes the sources on the article itself and the talk page. I didn't check each author for each paper, but there are four references on the article's talk page, and three of them are non-independent even without considering the reliability of the publishers: Giorgio Metta of the Sage reference is scientific director of the Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia (the same Metta, G. as in the article's references) and Lorenzo Natale of the 2016 Springer reference is a tenured senior scientist at the same institution, which is an institution that develops the program and owns the copyright for some of the material in the program. One of the authors of the 2014 Springer reference is Silvio Traversaro, who is one of the primary maintainers of the program's GitHub. The fourth reference is the Frontiers reference which appears to be independent, though confidence in the publisher isn't high due to considerations like the WikiProject Academic Journals assessment and an RSN disucssion (as well as non-robotics discussions including Public Health, Neurology, Genetics). The last potential reference in the article itself is this, which is not significant coverage. - Aoidh (talk) 02:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete, like Aoidh and JSS above, I can't find reliable secondary sources. The sources that pop up when searching are connected to the project. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.

Studio Yotta

Studio Yotta (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 notable, looks like a company portfolio. IgelRM (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Oregon. IgelRM (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Video games, Companies, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Lean delete. I'm having a hard time finding non-trivial coverage in news sources. [7][8] (not sure of their reliability, but seem ok for pop culture on a quick glance?) are all I can find. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 07:58, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Can’t find the kind secondary source coverage needed for notability. Contributor892z (talk) 20:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Big 12 men's basketball tournament finals broadcasters

List of Big 12 men's basketball tournament finals broadcasters (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)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Basketball, and Lists. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per
  WP:OR making a list of trivia only suitable for the fandom wiki. Conyo14 (talk) 14:49, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of West Coast Conference Men's Basketball Tournament Finals broadcasters.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Subject does not meet the
  WP:PRIMARY. Let'srun (talk) 20:59, 31 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 23:46, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of SEC men's basketball tournament finals broadcasters

List of SEC men's basketball tournament finals broadcasters (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)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Basketball, and Lists. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per
  WP:OR making a list of trivia only suitable for the fandom wiki. Conyo14 (talk) 14:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of West Coast Conference Men's Basketball Tournament Finals broadcasters.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Subject does not meet the
  WP:NLIST as this grouping isn't discussed in non-primary sources. Sources are press releases, internet forums, and YouTube clips, none of which contribute to notability. Let'srun (talk) 18:30, 31 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 14:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miles Mausoleum

Miles Mausoleum (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 evidence of wp:notability under SNG or GNG. A mausoleum in a cemetery. The only source is the cemetery's grave location website. Note that the creator's user name is also Miles. This is an older article that recently got set for NPP review, I believe due to a name change. North8000 (talk) 14:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC) North8000 (talk) 14:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Mccapra (talk) 18:20, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: fails GNG/
  WP:NBUILDING C F A 💬 01:29, 28 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 14:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Nirmohgarh (1702)

Battle of Nirmohgarh (1702) (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)

It literally does not has any sources cited in it. Based.Kashmiri ^(🗨️) 13:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The Encyclopedia of Sikhism mentions a battle at Nirmohgarh, though apparently in 1700 rather than 1702. We don't appear to have an article on Nirmohgarh at all, though clearly it is a place that existed, of some significance. Also mentioned in this book, and here, apparently again at a somewhat earlier date. BD2412 T 14:16, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete the place may well have existed, there may have been a battle there, but this article does not seem to be about those, and is thus OR. Slatersteven (talk) 14:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as per Slatersteven--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. Shellwood (talk) 14:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as lacking proper sourcing to be verifiable, Mccapra (talk) 18:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per previous. A battle may have occurred at this location but sources don't back it being this one at this date. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 11:14, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Reviewed the sources in the version before all were removed and I could not verify them. The year and location of the battle is also questionable given from the search by editor BD2412. RangersRus (talk) 14:38, 27 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 14:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meritt North

Meritt North (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)

Semi-advertorialized

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 13:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Dear Bearcat,

  I appreciate the opportunity to address the concerns raised about the citations supporting the role of Krystle Minkoff as an actress. It is important to ensure that the information on Wikipedia is both accurate and verifiable.

  Regarding the citations numbered 12-17, I would like to emphasize that these sources are independently verified and adequately support her credited role as an actress under her given legal name, Krystle Minkoff. These credits are also reflected on IMDb, which follows strict guidelines for crediting individuals in the entertainment industry.

  It is important to note that the aim should be to enhance the quality of information on Wikipedia, not to indiscriminately nominate entire articles for deletion due to issues with specific sections or titles. Each piece of information should be evaluated on its own merits and improved where necessary.

  There are numerous citations that document her work as an actress, voice actress, and author under both Meritt North and Krystle Minkoff. These sources collectively substantiate her contributions and career, aligning with Wikipedia’s standards for verifiability and notability.

  I hope this clarifies the situation, and I am open to working collaboratively to address any specific concerns you may have to ensure the information remains reliable and well-documented.

  Best regards,

  ScorpioKLM Mooresklm2016 (talk) 14:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If there is room for improvement or a few items that you absolutely insist must be removed, let's work together to resolve them. I don't think that just because you may take issue with one or a couple items, that the entire page is not useful, informational, and in the public interest.

  ScorpioKLM Mooresklm2016 (talk) 14:15, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again: we are not looking for simple verification that she had acting roles. The notability test for an actress is not passed by listing acting roles, it's passed by showing evidence that people without a vested interest in her career (namely journalists and film critics) have assessed her performances as being significant enough to analyze in prose. Such as reviews of the films or television shows which singled her performances out for attention, or journalist-written news articles profiling her. The notability test for a Wikipedia article is not "did stuff", it's "had independent third-party attention and analysis bestowed upon the stuff that she did by people who weren't just being paid to publicize her". So establishing notability as an actress doesn't hinge on her own résumé, or IMDB: it hinges on showing that her work as an actress has made her a subject that journalists cover as newsworthy in sources independent of herself. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as there isn't any secondary sources which are good enough to make her notable. OhHaiMark (talk) 01:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Bearcat, how about deleting the title of actress and the acting credits table. Would this suit you? ScorpioKLM

No, that wouldn't "suit" me, because you haven't properly established her notability as a writer or audiobook narrator either. Those work the same way: her notability for either of those things is not established by citing her work to itself as proof that it exists, and still requires literary critics to establish her books as significant by reviewing them in newspapers, magazines or literary journals.
No matter what occupation a person works in, they always still have to be shown to have

reliable sources independent of their own public relations materials, and you simply haven't used any GNG-worthy sourcing to support this article at all. So the problem isn't resolved just by taking acting roles out of the article, because you haven't properly sourced her writing or narration work either. The whole article is badly sourced, not just the acting section alone. Bearcat (talk) 14:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Multiple Independent Sources: The citations we’ve included are from multiple independent sources, not just self-references or public relations materials. These sources include reputable databases, industry publications, and media outlets that adhere to strict verification standards. 
Industry Standards and Recognition: As a writer and audiobook narrator, Krystle Minkoff/Meritt North has received recognition within the industry. While you emphasize the need for literary critics to review her books, the notability can also be established through awards, nominations, and notable projects she has been a part of. These are documented in the citations provided. 
Audiobook Narration: The role of an audiobook narrator is inherently significant within the literary and entertainment industries. Notability in this field is often established through the body of work and collaborations with well-known authors and publishers. Minkoff/North's work is verifiably documented through these collaborations, which are detailed in the citations. 
WP 
Compliance: We have adhered to Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines (WP 
). The sources used to support her notability are reliable, independent, and provide significant coverage about her work. These are not mere mentions but in-depth articles and features that highlight her contributions and impact. 
Proof in Citations: The citations include reviews, interviews, and articles from established media and literary platforms. These are GNG-worthy sources that validate her achievements and establish her as a notable figure in both writing and audiobook narration. 
Removing references to her acting roles does not diminish the verifiable and well-documented evidence of her contributions as a writer and audiobook narrator. The proof is in the detailed and independent citations that have been meticulously provided to support her notability in these fields. 
I believe that a comprehensive evaluation of the sources will reveal that the criteria for notability are indeed met, and Krystle Minkoff's diverse career merits recognition across her various roles. 

I highly disagree. Krystle Minkoff and Meritt North have been cited over 90 times by various websites, online newspapers, journals, and magazines crediting her for all of her audiobook narrations. 

However, in order for IMDb to credit officially, it has to be reviewed and approved by IMDb, casting directors, directors, and other actors. It is up for scrutiny by all and goes through a lengthy period of scrutinization before being attributed a final credit. There are 3 titles to which Meritt aka Krystle Minkoff and credited by such, has this blue official IMDb credit. Just a consideration. 

Here is the strict incliusion of credits criteria that must be met on IMDb. https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/filmography-credits/imdb-credit-eligibility-faq/GXMWNMB8LQCZYFH8?ref_=helpart_nav_10# 
What do you mean by "eligible"? 
A. As stated above, the first and most important thing is to have received a credit on the title. There are a few additional requirements -- we normally only list people who were credited in the original version of a title. For films, this means we'll only list people credited in the initial original theatrical release; for TV titles, it means people credited when the show first aired. 

B. When a title is announced or in production and is added to the database, our editors will normally start accepting credits for it. These credits, as per the disclaimer on the page, are always subject to change and can be removed at any time. When the title is actually released (or about to be released) and credits are finalized by the production, our editors routinely compare our listing with the actual on-screen credits and delete any entries that cannot be verified or do not match. If you used to be listed on a title and your credit has disappeared, it means our editors could not verify its accuracy during one of these routine checks. 

C. There are 4 credits that have been verified by IMDb. 

2017 
Reelz Murder Made Me Famous | 2 Episodes 
Patron & Mother 

2017 
John Gotti | Season 3, Episode 8 
Steak House Patron 

2017 
David Koresh | Season 3, Episode 7 
Mother 

2016 
Queen of the South (TV series) | 4 episodes 
Campaign Supporter 

E. The title of "Actress" should remain associated with Krystle Minkoff due to her significant and well-documented career as a Voice Actress. Here are several key points supporting this stance: 

Extensive Experience: Krystle Minkoff has an extensive body of work as a Voice Actress, which inherently falls under the broader category of acting. Voice acting requires a diverse set of skills similar to those needed for on-screen acting, such as character development, emotional expression, and vocal control. 

Notable Roles: Her roles as a Voice Actress have been notable and influential within the industry. These roles contribute to her overall recognition as an actress, as voice acting is a respected and integral part of the entertainment field. 

Published Credits: There are numerous publications and sources that document her work as a Voice Actress. These sources include her credited roles on platforms such as IMDb, which adhere to strict guidelines for verifying the legitimacy of professional credits. 

Industry Standards: In the entertainment industry, individuals who perform voice acting are commonly referred to as actors or actresses. This standard industry terminology reflects the comprehensive nature of their work, encompassing all forms of acting, whether it be on-screen or voice-over. 

Verifiability and Notability: The information regarding her career as a Voice Actress is verifiable through multiple independent sources, fulfilling Wikipedia’s criteria for notability. This substantiates her professional title as an actress, encompassing her voice acting achievements. 

Removing the title of "Actress" would not only undermine her substantial contributions to the field of voice acting but also misrepresent the comprehensive nature of her career. Therefore, it is both accurate and appropriate to maintain the title of "Actress" to reflect her extensive and notable experience in the industry. 

Kindly review and advise. 
ScorpioKLM 

Bearcat, I respectfully disagree with your statement that we haven't properly established Krystle Minkoff's notability as a writer or audiobook narrator. Let me explain why I believe the proof is in the citations provided: 
Multiple Independent Sources: The citations we’ve included are from multiple independent sources, not just self-references or public relations materials. These sources include reputable databases, industry publications, and media outlets that adhere to strict verification standards. 
Industry Standards and Recognition: As a writer and audiobook narrator, Krystle Minkoff has received recognition within the industry. While you emphasize the need for literary critics to review her books, the notability can also be established through awards, nominations, and notable projects she has been a part of. These are documented in the citations provided. 
Audiobook Narration: The role of an audiobook narrator is inherently significant within the literary and entertainment industries. Notability in this field is often established through the body of work and collaborations with well-known authors and publishers. Minkoff’s work is verifiably documented through these collaborations, which are detailed in the citations. 
WP 
Compliance: We have adhered to Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines (WP 
). The sources used to support her notability are reliable, independent, and provide significant coverage about her work. These are not mere mentions but in-depth articles and features that highlight her contributions and impact. 
Proof in Citations: The citations include reviews, interviews, and articles from established media and literary platforms. These are GNG-worthy sources that validate her achievements and establish her as a notable figure in both writing and audiobook narration. 
Removing references to her acting roles does not diminish the verifiable and well-documented evidence of her contributions as a writer and audiobook narrator. The proof is in the detailed and independent citations that have been meticulously provided to support her notability in these fields. 
I believe that a comprehensive evaluation of the sources will reveal that the criteria for notability are indeed met, and Krystle Minkoff's diverse career merits recognition across her various roles. 

I highly disagree. Krystle Minkoff and Meritt North have been cited over 90 times by various websites, online newspapers, journals, and magazines crediting her for all of her audiobook narrations. 

In addition: When a title on IMDb is announced or in production and is added to the database, thier editors will normally start accepting credits for it. These credits, as per the disclaimer on the page, are always subject to change and can be removed at any time. When the title is actually released (or about to be released) and credits are finalized by the production, our editors routinely compare our listing with the actual on-screen credits and delete any entries that cannot be verified or do not match. If you used to be listed on a title and your credit has disappeared, it means our editors could not verify its accuracy during one of these routine checks. 

D. There are 4 credits that have been verified by IMDb. 

2017 
Reelz Murder Made Me Famous | 2 Episodes 
Patron & Mother 

2017 
John Gotti | Season 3, Episode 8 
Steak House Patron 

2017 
David Koresh | Season 3, Episode 7 
Mother 

2016 
Queen of the South (TV series) | 4 episodes 
Campaign Supporter 

E. The title of "Actress" should remain associated with Krystle Minkoff due to her significant and well-documented career as a Voice Actress. Here are several key points supporting this stance: 

Extensive Experience: Krystle Minkoff has an extensive body of work as a Voice Actress, which inherently falls under the broader category of acting. Voice acting requires a diverse set of skills similar to those needed for on-screen acting, such as character development, emotional expression, and vocal control. 

Notable Roles: Her roles as a Voice Actress have been notable and influential within the industry. These roles contribute to her overall recognition as an actress, as voice acting is a respected and integral part of the entertainment field. 

Published Credits: There are numerous publications and sources that document her work as a Voice Actress. These sources include her credited roles on platforms such as IMDb, which adhere to strict guidelines for verifying the legitimacy of professional credits. 

Industry Standards: In the entertainment industry, individuals who perform voice acting are commonly referred to as actors or actresses. This standard industry terminology reflects the comprehensive nature of their work, encompassing all forms of acting, whether it be on-screen or voice-over. 

Verifiability and Notability: The information regarding her career as a Voice Actress is verifiable through multiple independent sources, fulfilling Wikipedia’s criteria for notability. This substantiates her professional title as an actress, encompassing her voice acting achievements. 

Removing the title of "Actress" would not only undermine her substantial contributions to the field of voice acting but also misrepresent the comprehensive nature of her career. Therefore, it is both accurate and appropriate to maintain the title of "Actress" to reflect her extensive and notable experience in the industry. 

Review policy at this URL: https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/filmography-credits/imdb-credit-eligibility-faq/GXMWNMB8LQCZYFH8?ref_=helpart_nav_10# 

Kindly review and advise. 
ScorpioKLM 

These are GNG-worthy sources that validate her achievements and establish her as a notable figure in both writing and audiobook narration.

No, you have not cited third-party media coverage and analysis about it, you're citing her own work's presence as titles for sale in online bookstores. Again: you do not establish a writer's notability by citing her work to its own presence on Amazon or Audible or Kobo or Booktopia or Overdrive; you establish a writer's notability by citing it to journalists and/or literary critics independently reviewing her work in a newspaper, magazine or literary journal. Bearcat (talk) 15:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry, Law, Politics, Medicine, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - We can't use literally everything proffered above by ScorpioKLM (

threads critiques 15:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete - the article is sourced to primary sources. I can find no coverage at all to substantiate inclusion of this biography on Wikipedia. -- Whpq (talk) 17:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Despite the wall of words, notability is not established. Mccapra (talk) 18:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete In addition to the above, there's statements like "Meritt North had a successful 20-year career in sleep medicine prior to her career in the entertainment industry" - her entertainment career began in 2016 when she would have been 33. One link in her bibliography (Journal of Sleep Disorders & Therapy) is flagged as an unreliable source. Orange sticker (talk) 22:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Admin comment I've p-blocked Mooresklm2016 from here & the article to allow discussion to continue uninterrupted. They have made a sufficient case for closer to take it on board when assessing the discussion. Star Mississippi 14:02, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete: per G11. voorts (talk/contributions) 16:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above comments - obviously promotional and inadequate third-party coverage. HarukaAmaranth 01:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete does not satisfy the GNG; no SIGCOV RS available. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 05:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Along with everyone else I couldn't find
  WP:GNG isn't met. TarnishedPath^talk 06:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment - Timbo's Rule 14. "Whenever you see multiple stacked footnotes in a lead to document a subject phrase as encyclopedic, it probably isn't." (March 2012) — tim /// Carrite (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I endorse that rule! Bearcat (talk) 16:38, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. You might have noticed that the article creator has used the names Krystle Minkoff and Meritt North interchangeably so I'm assuming that they are the same person. Looking into previous articles by a similarly named account, User:Mooresklm I came across Draft:Krystle Minkoff which was deleted multiple times. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I presumed it was a true name/pseudonym situation (similar to

  threads critiques 07:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

I looked at the deleted article and Krystle Minkoff's birth name is, surprise! Krystle Lee'Ann Moores. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unzela Khan

Unzela Khan (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)

It appears the subject doesn't meet the WP:JOURNALIST or WP:AUTHOR, as their works don't seem noteworthy enough. The press coverage in WP:RS also not significant or in depth enough, so fails to meet WP:GNG. Does not satisfy WP:N —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Pakistan, and United Kingdom. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Television, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the article is not noteworthy.

Crosji (talk) 05:00, 4 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!} 21:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or better to be moved to the draft Kotebeet (talk) 14:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I disagree with the nominator. A
  WP:NAUTHOR. What's then needed for an article? Not being braid doesn't mean it came be a standalone article. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:14, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Courtesy ping to @Saqib, @Crosji, and @Kotebeet for the argument per se. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I so saw so may PR but was able to get reliable ones. See here and here. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  SafariScribe, I'm curious about how she meets the WP:JOURNALIST criteria simply for working at Huffpost. The policy doesn't say anything like this. Additionally, is writing just one book sufficient to meet WP:NAUTHOR? —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  One book which is reviewed by reliable sources is considered as notable. But may not require a article. However, we usually have problem when journalists wrote about others as few or less writing about them, in other way, winning an award for such excellence in media is part of both ANYBIO and JOURNALISM. While these are additional criteria, the article generally meets our

  WP:SIGCOV. Even as there isn't any fact for such, a redirect should have served better not only when she won a major award and a book mistake reviewed. Let's be truthful herein and ignore certain additional essays. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Delete, because the article raises concerns regarding its credibility due to several factors: 1) Excessive Referencing: With only six sentences, the presence of ten references seems disproportionate. This abundance of citations may suggest an attempt to over-validate the content rather than provide genuine support for the points made. 2) Questionable Contributor: The primary contributor, "User:Kotebeet," [contributed approximately 80% of the content], is no longer active on the platform. This raises doubts about the reliability and verifiability of the information provided, as there is no way to verify the expertise or credibility of the contributor.--Crosji (talk) 09:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @

  WP:GNG. If you have any issue with the creator, then face them. I can't find any argument you're making besides you vote says "not noteworthy". Meaning? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  @

  WP:REFBOMB here. I don't seem to understand your statement This raises doubts about the reliability and verifiability of the information provided, as there is no way to verify the expertise or credibility of the contributor, when a creator doesn't require anything on whether to delete an article or keep them. However, this is a process and you can't vote twice. Do remove any of the votes. Thanks! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Focus on policy, not issues that can be addressed via editing and Crosji, please strike your duplicate vote.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 13:28, 26 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 14:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hermie and Friends

Hermie and Friends (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)

Granted that I don't know what reference sources would discuss this Christian animated children's show but I didn't find anything in my online search that wasn't either user-generated content, product-focused (promotion) or sites that allowed users to view episodes. I found no secondary sources or SIGCOV. One site called it an "award-winning" show but I never could locate what that award was. Given the detail of content about the characters, I think this article mainly serves as a nostalgia page for IP editors to write about a series they might have watched when they were younger. Dare I say it? I don't think it is notable or encyclopedic. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Christianity. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: So far I've found one review in the Wichita Falls Times Record News: "DVD hangs on wing, prayer and a caterpillar", which has eight brief paragraphs. I'll see if I can find anything else. Toughpigs (talk) 23:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Toughpigs, I'm impressed by your diligence. We have so many articles on marginal children's television series. I guess this one did have some coverage, at least in Wichita. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:03, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep this UT Daily Beacon review is independent, extensive, and as RS as any college student publication would be. In combination with the above, that would be a notability pass. Jclemens (talk) 05:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Of note but not contributing to notability, Tim Conway's obituaries do seem to mention this series (he voiced the main character) among his other clearly more well-known roles. Jclemens (talk) 05:09, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 13:26, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The sources presented above might show this is notable enough. If a redirect target can be found, not opposed to the idea. Needs a bit of trimming.... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Besides the reviews listed above, there is also this and this from The Dove Foundation and this from the School Library Journal. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 07:48, 29 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 00:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Capture of Kanchangarh

Capture of Kanchangarh (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 don't understand why this page is in the mainspace when the sources provide only one line of information about this topic, "After his successful mission of Adhoni, he annexed Kanchan Garh without any bloodshed." The ongoing issue with poorly documented Indian 'Wars,' 'Sieges,' 'Battles,' and 'Captures' articles needs to be thoroughly reviewed. Based Kashmiri (talk) 08:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:04, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Karnataka. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:32, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete.
  WP:SYNTH. 3 sources. One is unreliable publisher Xlibris. I cannot verify the source by M.P. Mujeebu Rehman and the last is not written by Abdul Khader but uploaded by him but has no coverage on the Capture significant enough to warrant a full fledged page. RangersRus (talk) 12:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:41, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as Indian battlebollox. Mccapra (talk) 18:29, 26 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.

Ordo Aurum Solis

Ordo Aurum Solis (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)

Seems almost whole primary sources, thus seems to not pass

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Astrology and Paranormal. Slatersteven (talk) 13:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless reliable secondary sources can be found, in which case the article would, of course, need to be completely rewritten. Brunton (talk) 15:48, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Which still might be best to nuke it for orbit and start from scratch? Slatersteven (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:TNT. Brunton (talk) 12:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Delete. No independent sources that would indicate notability outside of the bubble built by a couple of authors. –Austronesier (talk) 20:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unsure Weak Keep was thinking delete unless reliable sources can be found for this purported hermetic order. But maybe sources exist. Simonm223 (talk) 20:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Reliable sources exist that are not part of Llewelyn press after review. There are... not many... but they are sufficient not to warrant deletion. Simonm223 (talk) 12:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Simonm223: Such as? Here's the relevant Google Scholar search result:[9]. If you can present one or two independent RS among these for evaluation, that would be sufficient as a first step. –Austronesier (talk) 17:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The very first one is a non-Llewellyn book. [10] Simonm223 (talk) 18:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It's not just about "non-Llewellyn". Have a look at the first page of the preview. Do you consider Kraft's book an independent and reliable source? –Austronesier (talk) 18:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It's an in-universe description of a magical tradition. Wikipedia doesn't care if it's true. Just if it's notable. I am not suggesting Wikipedia should treat these descriptions as being of actual effects of magical ritual. I am just suggesting this group of magic type people appears to meet the minimum standard for

  WP:GNG. Barely. Simonm223 (talk) 18:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  And can't be used to establish notability. That needs to be done by third-party sources. Slatersteven (talk) 18:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia doesn't care if it's true. Sure, but Wikipedia cares if it's

  WP:GNG. –Austronesier (talk) 18:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Keep. This article suffers from poor management and sourcing, but it is not a non-notable organization in its "field," arguably on par with the Ciceros' Golden Dawn order, the now-defunct Open Source Order of the Golden Dawn, the Crowleyan A∴A∴/OTO and the (also under-written) Fraternitas Rosae Crucis. It would give an incomplete picture for this org to not have its own page. I'd mentioned this before, but maybe I could give this article a real try at sourcing. As was suggested above, starting from scratch (but without deletion) might be the best option.

AnandaBliss (talk) 13:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its been tagged as needing this for over 10 years. Slatersteven (talk) 13:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfD is not cleanup. Simonm223 (talk) 12:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is because

wp:undue. Throwing out the rubbish is just what AFD is for. Slatersteven (talk) 10:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete, if it turns out there are sources, it would be better to restart from scratch given the state of the article. Allan Nonymous (talk) 19:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment some Google Scholar entries apparently exist. I have not reviewed yet. [11] Unsigned comment by Simonm223 (talk) 20:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep with comment. As I write this article claims Ordo Aurum Solis was founded by George Stanton and Charles Kingold, names confirmed here in Encyclopedia.com. However, that encyclopedia doesn't say it was the Christian bishop George Stanton. It likely would have been a blasphemous scandal for him to do such a thing and the alleged founding is not and was never mentioned in bishop Stanton's Wikipedia biography. Stanton and Kingold are called "occultists" in another encyclopedia.com article [12]. KEEP because Ordo Aurum Solis qualifies for an entry in encyclopedia.com. 5Q5|^✉ 12:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I de-Wikified George Stanton as not being the Christian bishop but an occultist. An online search for "George Stanton" occultist confirms this. 5Q5|^✉ 09:43, 17 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!} 22:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The current article is improperly sourced and/or WP:OR, promotional ("The current Grand Master Jean-Louis de Biasi continues to maintain the high moral standards of this tradition") and unsalvageable. If sufficient appropriate sources can ever be found to justify a new article, none of the existing content will be required. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:38, 26 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 Kid Icarus (series)#Characters. Consensus is the sourcing depth is not there to support a standalone. I will protect the redirect to avoid a 4th AfD, but the suggestion of working on a draft is a good one. It should go thorugh AfC to avoid further issues though as consensus in both 2024 AFDs is strong. Star Mississippi 15:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pit (Kid Icarus)

Pit (Kid Icarus) (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)

Article was brought back recently, and again I feel the arguments of the previous AfD hold true here. Every new source added- with few exceptions- are either unreliable or a very trivial mention in a review of Uprising. Even using sources from the previous iteration of Pit's article, there still isn't nearly enough for a whole article. I recommend to restore the redirect, since nothing has been proven to state that the discussion's consensus has changed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Kazama16, who revived the article, for thoughts. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore Redirect - This was just Merged by pretty strong consensus at an AFD just three months ago, and really should not have been unilaterally restored without some kind of discussion first, which as far as I can see did not happen. But, regardless of that, the current version does not show any greater coverage in reliable sources that was presented or found in the previous discussion. All of the added sources in the reception section are simply reviews and coverage of Kid Icarus: Uprising as a whole, where the few sentences and quotes that specifically talk about Pit as a character are being cherry picked out to give the illusion of significant coverage. Uprising was a notable game that garnered many reviews, but cobbling together a dozen minor sentences of "reception" on the main character in them do not add together to give Pit his own notability separate from that of the games he appears in. Rorshacma (talk) 02:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect Sources that are used are press releases, listicles, or articles about the game not the character. Still the same as the previous AfD. Update. Article still fails notability. Most were just trivia or passing mentions. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 03:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Boneless Pizza! Listicles??? where show me sources that cite "Top 10 best video game characters", Top 10 archers in video games" show me where are those sources? please carefully check the article before choosing your decision. Also what about page no 8 and 9 of this book in Portuguese about Pit.[13]] This whole article is about him.[14] and this too [15] (about his supposed design). There might be even more sources that are currently not present in the article, so stop being quick for deletion as I suggest. Kazama16 (talk) 09:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I was exaggerating about listicles, but you're just throwing unreliable sources here except the book one which might be bit useful. Pls do not bludgeon the discussion and make any

WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES argument. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 05:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

To be fair to your original assessment, I would say this one is definitely a listicle (and one that isn't even on Pit at that!), so you were not wrong. Rorshacma (talk) 05:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there is a mention of Pit in it on 9# Tetris. Quote= How cool is that? Well, it’s even cooler than you think because it’s not only Link; Samus Aran joins him on the cello, Pit plays the violin Kazama16 (talk) 09:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you think "How cool is that? Pit plays the violin" is a valuable commentary to add at the article? 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 10:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's about the game he appeared in not reception Kazama16 (talk) 10:19, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say he wasn't mentioned in it, I said that he was not the topic of the listicle in question. That sentence you quoted is the very definition of trivial coverage that is a very good example of showing what kind poor sources and cherry picked quotes are having to be used to try to make it look like the character has more coverage than he actually does. Rorshacma (talk) 15:16, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't really bludgeoning, they're just defending their reasons for making the article. Regardless, per above, 3 is only dev info, and that can only go so far given the lackluster Reception. The Fwoosh does not seem to be a reliable source. The book source is entirely plot summary from a quick read. None of these seem to be making an impact on notability, and per prior AfDs, searches for sources have historically turned up very little, making the THEREMUSTBESOURCES argument moot. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 05:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "so stop being quick for deletion as I suggest" doesn't sound right. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 05:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested the nominator not you, in a friendly way. Kazama16 (talk) 09:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but it still doesn't sound right to say it like that, and I don't think it is in a "friendly way". Sometimes it is really hard to help you, like I already told you before not to work on your Draft:Takeda Takahashi, because that character is not notable, but yet you still persist. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 10:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bring my past to this discussion, it has nothing to do with it. Kazama16 (talk) 10:20, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore Redirect My prior rationale remains the same. I agree that it should have been discussed before it was restored. Perhaps it's worth pinging the restorer to this discussion to maybe give their opinion? Personally, I would not have taken it to AfD knowing the outcome will be the same, just redirect it. Conyo14 (talk) 07:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I felt it was likely going to cause some dispute if I did BLAR it, hence why I chose to AfD it. Additionally, I have already pinged the restorer, and they are actively participating in the discussion. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you, I had drafted my response before seeing the restorer's active discussion Conyo14 (talk) 19:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. While I think the article needs clean up and a trim to focus on best sources, from a search I'm left with a sense of sufficient coverage, beyond trivial mentions in a game review, of Pit as a multimedia character not reducible to a Kid Icarus redirect (perhaps only just, but even so). Participants in the discussion may already be aware of this IGN article which covers Pit across several media appearances outside Kid Icarus. In addition to that, I found this Bleeding Cool article reporting on and assessing a Pit figurine. And the first chapter of this academic book from Bloomsbury Publishing includes coverage of the Pit character in the Kid Icarus franchise. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 07:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  A figurine/merchandise doesn't help

  WP:GNG; thus the article is still in a weak state. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 10:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  The article has not been checked properly; the nominator has only looked over the reception section without checking the further reading section and assumed that it is not notable per the other two previous AFDS. Kazama16 (talk) 10:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Lacking evidence that the nominator has not done that, I must say that as someone who has, it would not have caused me to change my mind about nominating it. All of the further reading section is either

  WP:ROUTINE articles coming about due to Uprising's announcement or an interesting but unreliable student article for a student magazine. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 15:21, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Forgive me for missing that, most video game character articles lack significant external reading sections, and additionally, those with them typically cite the articles in the Reception. In any case, per Cukie Gherkin above, I see no real significant coverage on Pit as a character in here. One is a review of an action figure unrelated to Pit's character, and the majority of the others are routine Kid Icarus Uprising coverage. The Writer's Block Magazine source looks decent, but I am unfamiliar with their reliability. In any case, one good source out of a swamp of them isn't really enough to justify Pit as an article. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't really see much commentary in the IGN article. It seems more to be a summary of Pit's appearances, and any commentary that could be taken out of it is cherry picking. The Siliconera article is less about Pit and more about the make of a figurine than anything. The book source seems to be more about the Kid Icarus game itself being compared to the game Athena. Anything relating to Pit is in regards to his character is just plot summary, though correct me if I've missed anything. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  On the book source,

  WP:SIGCOV coverage that summarizes is prohibited. A Wikipedia article shouldn't be purely summary, but that doesn't necessarily mean a source isn't significant coverage if it is providing summarization. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Restore redirect Nothing against articles getting revived, but this is still in the same place it was from the last AfD.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]