Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politicians

Points of interest related to WikiProject – Deletions – Cleanup

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Politicians. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Politicians|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Politicians. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politicians/archive
• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politicians/archive 2

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politics for a general list of deletion debates on related issues.

Katherine Mathewson (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)

Politician whose claim to notability is not verifiable. Evidently leader of the Green Party of Ontario in 1990, though our article on the party indicates that it elected its first leader in 1993, and her own bio notes that the party was a highly decentralized organization at the time. The claim that she was the party's leader is cited to her appearance representing the party in a community television event, and a second source is given as evidence that she is not mentioned on the party's website.

There is a Katherine Mathewson contesting the riding of Oshawa in the 2025 federal election, but I can't determine if this is the same person, there is a 35-year time gap, and just running in an election does not confer notability anyway. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 12:43, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Canada. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 12:43, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:52, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as not verifiable Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:02, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhay Deshpande (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 references are available related to the claim of being a Member of the

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, India, and Maharashtra. Taabii (talk) 12:11, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmed Abdulshafi Bassey (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)

Only things I can find are mirror sites, and the Sudan Tribune source doesn't even mention him as far as I can tell. If there is nothing on him to be found, then this fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Sudan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:03, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Praveen Prabhakar (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)

Praveen Prabhakar (Jharkhand 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)

Disputed draftification.

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, India, and Jharkhand. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 15:32, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Individual does not seem notable, a search reveals a film editor in the majority of results who already has an article at Praveen Prabhakar which was also nominated for deletion. Stickymatch 07:26, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep- there are plenty of citations to back the subject. Try searching "Praveen Prabhakar Jharkhand" as keyword, it shows ample amount of information about the person. Baliputraangad (talk) 12:20, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added few more citations. Try searching the person by including jharkhand along his name, it will show you plenty of information on him. There is also a Documentary – Lost leaders of Jharkhand made on his life which I have incuded in citations.Baliputraangad (talk) 11:09, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note : Baliputraangad moved Praveen Prabhakar (Politician) to Praveen Prabhakar (Jharkhand Politician) and removed the redirect. Adding links to facilitate continued discussion. Cabayi (talk) 12:34, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Darnelda Siegers (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 fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Canada. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:43, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Berun Omar Fatah (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 fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Iraq. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew McCormick (Northern Ireland 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)

Subject fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Northern Ireland. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:55, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Irfan Ali (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)

Low-level government functionary whose news coverage does not go beyond

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Pakistan. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 01:38, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sean Orr (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)

Disputed PROD, and that’s totally fine. But the de-PROD-der did so with summary that prompted me to do another

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Canada. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:15, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, and Photography. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:19, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Seems to be plenty of secondary source and independent media coverage to me. Article could use some work, but that is not grounds for deletion. RedBlueGreen93 23:43, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roshena Campbell (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)

Unelected candidate. Fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, Politics, and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Melbourne is a big city. Its council members are likely to be notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:05, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Definitely the

  Lord Mayor but other than that, no other local government members have inherit notability (in my opinion). GMH Melbourne (talk) 03:11, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Speedy keep. Not only is the Deputy Lord Mayor of Australia's largest city an inherently notable position, but contrary to the claim in the nomination it's also an elected one, which she won in 2024: we even have an article about it at
  WP:RS
  that do not involve the 2023 by-election, and here's a selection:
  • She was a star Liberal candidate. The party passed (2021)
  • From barrister to Deputy Lord Mayor: Roshena Campbell shares her vision for the city’s future (2025)
  • Heated exchange at lord mayor forum in Southbank sparks war of words between rival teams (2024)
  • Nick Reece picks Roshena Campbell as his running mate (2024)

Jpatokal (talk) 10:09, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Per
  Wikipedia:POLOUTCOMES, mayors of cities of at least regional prominence have usually survived AFD, although the article should say more than just "Jane Doe is the mayor of Cityville". While she is not Lord Mayor, she is a citywide elected official as Deputy Lord Mayor and ran on a ticket with the incumbent Lord Mayor. The City of Melbourne (population 149,000) is a regionally significant city. That fact, combined with the coverage shown by Jpatoka, tells me that the subject LIKELY warrants an individual article depending on the specifics of the position (i.e. powers/responsibilities). I would need to know these before voting. If this were purely a city councilor who ran in a by-election, I would be a delete vote, so I'm really staking this on citywide officeholder with a real job in regionally significant city who has the coverage Jpatoka has identified.--Mpen320 (talk) 23:14, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  For context, since Australian municipal structures are a bit odd: the lowercase-c city of Melbourne is Australia's largest, with over 5.2 million people scattered across 31 "local government areas" (LGA). The uppercase-c City of Melbourne is the LGA covering the entire city center, and while the population living within the LGA is relatively low, its Lord Mayor & council wields outsize influence because they directly control zoning etc for all the largest businesses, restaurants, nightlife, transport hubs etc etc, and they're also the closest thing there is to a leader of the entire city.

  As a rough US analogy, it would be like if New York City didn't have a single mayor, but instead had a "Mayor of Manhattan", and there were 30 other boroughs, not 4. Jpatokal (talk) 00:35, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Mpen320: As far as I am aware from doing a bit of research the deputy Lord Mayor has the same power/responsibilities as a regular council expect they sub in for the Lord Mayor when they are away. For a bit of context, these are some of the sources available for the Deputy Lord Mayor of Sydney [1]. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:59, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I believe this to be closer to an edge case than the AfD nominator. I appreciate User:GMH Melbourne's follow-up descriptor and relation to NYC. I will note that
  WP:TOOSOON territory for Campbell. I do not think this nomination, if a deletion is found to be appropriate, this AfD should be used in the event of a recreation down the line if/when facts on the ground change.--Mpen320 (talk) 18:57, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Your line of argumentation is absurd. Campbell is a notable career politician who has been successfully elected twice, contested a nationally notable by-election once, and was covered by national media even before all this. You can't just wave a magic wand and say she's not notable if you ignore all the sources about four separate elections across five years, aka her political career. Jpatokal (talk) 23:38, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Elections by and large (particularly national government by-elections) are notable events. Participants in notable events (i.e. the candidates) are not necessarily notable for participating nor does coverage of their actions in such events make them notable except for unique circumstances (

  what can be called Melbourne, just the City of Melbourne as a local government area. Wikipedia's list of local government areas by population notes the City of Melbourne as the 33rd most populous LGA in Australia. The City of Casey is the largest LGA in Victoria. ​The size of the jurisdiction is not getting you over the top here.--Mpen320 (talk) 04:35, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  As I've already explained above, the Australian cities do not work like American cities. The City of Melbourne is far more important than any of the random suburban sprawl LGAs like Casey, and is responsible for things like defining the vision and goals of the entire metropolitan area. This pattern is consistent across Australian cities: Sydney's suburban

  City of Blacktown (#4 in Australia) is nearly twice the population of the City of Sydney, but Blacktown's mayor is not notable enough to warrant an article, while the office of the Deputy Lord Mayor of Sydney has its own article. Jpatokal (talk) 08:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Believe it or not, I actually do consider what you write in discussions. Did you miss that in addition to asking, I also looked up the statutory powers of the position? I think my past contributions demonstrate not only a strong interest in the subject matter of government and politics, but also the means to research and understand topics. Finally, I have no doubt that the City of Melbourne is more important than Casey. I was replying to the argument made of size, not an argument of prominence. It is Easter weekend so I will be taking a break and letting this AfD play out.--Mpen320 (talk) 14:02, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - elected deputy mayor of a regionally important city probably passes NPOL. The rule that unelected candidates don't get articles only applies when they lose election. She won. She lost a different election. Many successful, notable politicians will sometimes lose election. Are we going to delete Franklin D. Roosevelt because he lost election as Vice President? Bearian (talk) 04:31, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The election she lost was a Federal seat. The election she won is a local councillor which isn’t notable under

  WP:NPOL. GMH Melbourne (talk) 12:49, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

  ]

Statue of Ronald Reagan (Arlington, Virginia) (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)

Unable to find any coverage on the statue besides its unveiling in 2011:

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Visual arts, and Virginia. मल्ल (talk) 23:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, already been saved by the original author since your nomination. One of the many good sources added is from the Smithsonian, and now easily meets GNG. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:46, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The Washington Post oped is about the person and only mentions the statue in the title. The other added sources are also just about the unveiling, still doesn’t pass

  WP:SUSTAINED. मल्ल (talk) 13:38, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Merge to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport where the statue is located. This article is a three sentence stub. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 02:51, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That's an article quality assessment, not a source assessment. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:40, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Coverage in RS, meets GNG, and needs expansion. APK hi :-) (talk) 05:02, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per GNG and HEY. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:06, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per
  WP:HEY. This is an opinion of the notability of the work of art and its significant coverage, not an idealistic view of the man. Bearian (talk) 00:30, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete. By my count, we have one source that counts for notability. I've done research and I can't find any others.

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG ?
Smithsonian			Database entry	✘ No
14 News			Only 2 sentences are about the statue. The rest are about the man.	✘ No
NBC News				✔ Yes
Politico			Only 3 sentences are about the statue, the rest are about the man. And one of those sentences are about the people who were at the unveiling, not really about the statue itself, either.	✘ No
Washington Post		This is an opinion-piece about a writer's opinion of the man.	The vast majority is the writer's feelings towards the man, not the statue.	✘ No
Raegan Library			Database Entry	✘ No
Washington Times			Just a photo with one sentence about the statue.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

-- Mike 🗩 16:31, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Lupien (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: Politicians, Women, and New York. Bearcat (talk) 15:31, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This particular Wikipedia page is not exhaustive, but provides baseline biographical information for a major political figure in Rochester, NY. Holding public office does not entitle one to a Wikipedia page, however significance to regional culture, politics, history, etc. has long been used to deem eligibility of a Wikipedia page. Notable events, people, and places in Rochester often face barriers to entry in public forums given the diminishment or dismissal of their significance without due diligence to the media environment. Basic research on Mary Lupien in particular will point to her involvement in the aftermath of Daniel Prude's Killing, coverage of Rochester area policymaking, political dynamics in Western New York, national headline grabbing resistance to JD Vance, and public discourse on the Democratic Party. I understand that the current state of this page is minimal, but that was the point in creating it. Mary Lupien is a figure regularly discussed in media and government, so my intent is to create a framework for Wikipedia users to engage with and expand. As one person, I cannot in good faith attempt to singe-handedly source every substantive detail relevant to this or any topic. However, as a frequent user and participant in Rochester's local knowledge sharing, I can absolutely attest to the relevance and significance of Mary Lupien and numerous other topics. With pages like this, novice contributors with unique insights are punished for either 1) not adding enough information at one point in time or 2) creating too much bias or the perception thereof in what information is included. I am attempting to avoid this by sticking with easily sourced information on a topic significant to my community. The notability of this page's topic is absolutely significant enough to remain in the public forum at the very least to create a base for other users to contribute to. Swadd27 (talk) 16:03, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Thanks, nominator--now there's nothing I can add as a reason for deletion! Drmies (talk) 15:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Coverage is about her run for mayor or about saying things JD Vance didn't agree with [2], [3], I don't really see these as being notable. Oaktree b (talk) 22:11, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep for now until the election is over. She might win and then we'd bring it back anyways. Jeanette The keeper Martin (si?) 02:26, 14 April, 2025 (UTC)
• Redirect or selective merge into 2025 Rochester mayoral election. She's barely below the threshold for notability. We've deleted many articles about candidates per NPOL. If she wins, the edit history is saved and the article can be re-created easily. Bearian (talk) 14:58, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to
  WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Longhornsg (talk) 23:30, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

José Antonio Sossa (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)

Insufficient coverage, limited to talking about BLP court cases. I compile part of the conditions of a BLP "Biographies of living persons should be written conservatively and respecting the neutrality of the subject. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: its function is not to be sensationalist nor to be the main vehicle for the dissemination of judicial statements. Iban14mxl (talk) 19:47, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly
  Talk to my owner:Online 19:53, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Panama-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:59, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:59, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:21, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per
  AFD is not clean up Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 01:43, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

apart from the fact that it is unknown when he was born Iban14mxl (talk) 02:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elvire Jaspers (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)

Little indication of

• Keep  : A member of parliament should be notable. The links given now in the article have all expired, I'm unable to load the articles. There is confirmation as an MP on the parliamentary website. The few news articles that talk about her used for sourcing should be enough for a stub article. Oaktree b (talk) 14:35, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Latvia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:34, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Clearly passes
  deletion is not clean-up. Curbon7 (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2025 (UTC) Mea culpa, I did not do my due diligence in assessing this article. Curbon7 (talk) 05:58, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

*Keep as an NPOL pass but the article probably needs trimming. Mccapra (talk) 04:25, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and salt as hoax. Would you reconsider after looking at the below points, @Oaktree b @Curbon7 and @Mccapra?
  • Ref 5 and 9 about supposedly being a Saeima member do not work.
  • Ref 4 about supposedly receiving a presidential order does not mention her name.
  • Ref 6, 7, 8 and 10 about supposed endeavors in Latvia do not lead anywhere relevant.
  • Why don't any other Wikipedia page (most notably Thirteenth Saeima of Latvia) or interwiki page mention her?
  • My google search for "Elvire Jaspers" Saeima yielded 0 results outside of Wikipedia.
  • The same thing applies to "Elvire Jaspers" site:.lv.
  • This is not a Latvian person at all, try searching in Dutch domains and you will see that she is from the Netherlands.
  • When it was deleted previously, that article also contained hoaxes, such as holding the highest office within Dutch broadcasting.
• In my opinion, this is clearly a hoax. Geschichte (talk) 04:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as hoax, per Geschichte, and propose block of creating user unless @
  WP:RS about her membership of parliament. Note that her Wikidata entry was created on 11 April 2025 and has no sources except en.wiki. (I came here expecting to !vote "keep" for a member of parliament, AGF-ing that the sources were valid - sometimes good faith is apparently misplaced.) PamD 08:08, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• If this is a hoax, it can be deleted. I'm not sure, but I did notice there was a Dutch person with the same name during my search for sources. Oaktree b (talk) 11:30, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oaktree b: You said, above, There is confirmation as an MP on the parliamentary website. Did you miss out a "no" before "confirmation", or could you share that link? Thanks. PamD 11:44, 14 April 2025 (UTC) PamD 17:35, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: After reviewing the sources, the claims about her ties to Latvia and the receipt of the Order of Viesturs appear to be fabricated. There is no evidence she ever served in the Latvian Parliament, and the cited government document about the state honor names a different person. Her LinkedIn profile, which matches the image used in the article’s references, makes no mention of Latvian politics or national awards. This strongly suggests a
  WP:HOAX. HerBauhaus (talk) 13:42, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Speedy Delete and Salt per
  WP:HOAX. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 01:50, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Natasha Doyle-Merrick (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: Artists, Politicians, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:38, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Per nom. Yue🌙 02:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I agree with the nomination (and appreciate the detail). I am going to also note
  Wikipedia:NOTINHERITED as there is a citation that mentions her father is Jacky Jasper. I also did a Google News search and only found two non-election articles. The first is a Toronto Star article recounting a microaggression. The second is an Elle Canada piece that mentions her by name in a passing reference to that incident. I do not believe the Toronto Star article allows Natasha Doyl Merrick to meet GNG. Via the Wikipedia Library, I found nothing in the Newspapers Archive or EBSCO Host. A Google search of "Natasha Doyle" site:www.theglobeandmail.com only reveals an article abou the 2025 withdraw.--Mpen320 (talk) 14:54, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Fact: Subject is a public figure. Fact: Subject represents what a Black-Canadian Woman in Ontario (and Canadian) politics looks like. Fact: Subject is a living person who has clearly contributed a consistency of works deemed relevant by credible media outlets.

  Note: We, as Wikipedia contributors, are not here to judge, we are here to document fact. these are the facts. We are here to ensure that all fact -- whether or not we may or may not individually "like" a thing and/or be in support of a thing --- the fact remains that a thing is a thing and that thing happened. We are not here to Censor information. We are not here to DELETE fact. In fact, censorship and the deletion of fact goes against everything that the Democracy of the Wikipedia Movement stands for.

  I call for those three of you commenters who are here -- not to add to this Wikipedia Movement , but rather you are proving to takeaway from this non-governmental encyclopedic movement By We The People, For We The People -- for you @Bearcat and Co. are proven to clearly be invested in the censorship of relevant, valuable information from this Wikipedia Mission, by your unjust nomination to clear the record of a Black Canadian woman political figure and a public inspiration of promise for a young black girls across Canada *** Please see TVO report, Black women in Ontario politics — past, present, and future , a 2022 article addressing the role that Black woman candidates serves to inspire Black female youth to consider entering politics after seeing Black woman as politcal candidates that look like them. "According to Velma Morgan, chair of Operation Black Vote Canada —an organization that supports the election of Black people to public office — while Black women run at rates roughly equal to those of Black men, they still run in lower numbers compared to other demographics. ... "politics was often portrayed as a corrupt old-boys’ club, and as a Black woman, the idea of running seemed almost unimaginable to her ... "Supporting Black candidates doesn’t simply affect government — a range of diverse candidates will likely increase the participation of diverse voters, says Tolley: “There is a definitive link between the presence of a more diverse range of people in public life and the desire and willingness of a broader range of voters to get involved and participate.” Tolley says there is evidence that, when members of historically underrepresented groups begin to run for office and get elected in larger numbers, that encourages voter participation. And there’s also a spin-off role-model effect, she adds, pointing to the fact that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama increased the desire of young women and Black people to participate in politics."... "The impact extends to those who aren’t even old enough to vote. Kitchener Centre NDP MPP Laura Mae Lindo says, “I've had Black young women that have run up to me when they've seen me in the hallways and say that they couldn’t even believe their eyes when they saw somebody with [dreadlocks] standing in the chamber.”...

  This debate was prompted after User @Bearcat nominated the page Natasha Doyle-Merrick for deletion, stating that the Subject should not "have a page" ((?????). The user @Bearcat then made another notion that "anyone can run as a candidate in a political election" and noted that just because a person is a candidate does not secure them "a page" ... Not only is this nomination for deletion unjust and clearly based on subjective opinion, "Erin Tolley, an associate professor of political science at Carleton University, notes that "politics can be a hostile environment, particularly for racialized women. “Historically, there haven't been a lot of highly visible role models,” she says. “And when those role models come forward, in some cases, rather than being role models of what one is able to accomplish in politics, they instead become role models for how hostile the space is.” .https://www.tvo.org/article/thats-how-you-do-it-black-women-in-ontario-politics-past-present-and-future

  • • • Consider the recent deletion of Jackie Robinson record of military service: https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/44316899/defense-department-removes-story-robinson-military-serviceHumanWritesBook (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Fact: Subject is a public figure. Fact: Subject represents what a Black-Canadian Woman in Ontario (and Canadian) politics looks like. Fact: Subject is a living person who has clearly contributed a consistency of works deemed relevant by credible media outlets. HumanWritesBook (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2025 (UTC), entered for We the People, by We the People, in support of a Racially Diverse face of Politics in Canada, inclusive of Black Women on the Political campaign trail and in political office ... @Bearcat "Just because you didn't vote for a candidate, that doest mean that they didn't run. (I smell censorship )...in play ... Fact is Fact. Truth is Truth.Let the record of fact reflected in the page Natasha Doyle-Merrick , remain, for it is just and good. https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/books/2018/10/08/four-women-share-their-stories-new-book-colored-girls-who-have-considered-politics/1521940002/ HumanWritesBook (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fact: every single candidate in every single election everywhere can always claim to be a "public figure" by virtue of having run as a candidate in an election — so just asserting that the subject is a "public figure" does not automatically get them into Wikipedia in and of itself. People get into Wikipedia by passing

WP:NPOL-passing office, not by running for one and then withdrawing mid-campaign, and an artist gets an article by having professional art critics externally analyze the significance of her work, not just by using the self-published websites of art galleries to prove that her work exists. Our inclusion standards do not work differently based on race or gender — she hasn't been "targeted" because she's a black woman, the article has been listed for discussion because it isn't saying anything about her would pass our notability criteria. (Note as well that I've personally been the creator of numerous articles about both men and women of colour within the past couple of weeks alone, so I can hardly be accused of any sort of racism here.) Bearcat (talk) 21:54, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Shortcut

• WP:AFDSOCK

Peace and Good will to all Wikipedians... in the matter of the unjust and clearly evident politically-motivated bias move to nominated the page Natasha Doyle-Merrick for deletion ... a page of the Fact: Subject is a public figure. a page of the Fact: Subject represents what a Black-Canadian Woman in Ontario (and Canadian) politics as a two-time candidate and a public politcal artist recogninzed in mainstream media reports. .. a page of the Fact: Subject is a living person who has clearly contributed a consistency of works deemed relevant by credible media outlets.

In the journalistic cause of the true democracy of this

Sockpuppetry is not tolerated. All page information is fact, beyond the shadow of any doubt whatsoever. HumanWritesBook (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Fact: the subject Natasha Doyle-Merrick is a subject noted on at least eight (8) other Wikipedia articles:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eglinton%E2%80%94Lawrence_(provincial_electoral_district)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidates_of_the_2025_Ontario_general_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_politicians_who_have_switched_parties

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidates_of_the_2022_Ontario_general_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_New_Democratic_Party_candidates_in_the_2025_Ontario_general_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_New_Democratic_Party_candidates_in_the_2022_Ontario_provincial_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eglinton%E2%80%94Lawrence_(provincial_electoral_district)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Martin

... with supporting evidence of media coverage from CBC News

For the record HumanWritesBook (talk) 02:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

****

In the journalistic cause of the true democracy of this

Sockpuppetry is not tolerated. All page information is fact, beyond the shadow of any doubt whatsoever. HumanWritesBook (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply][reply

]

Note: We, as Wikipedia contributors, are not here to judge, we are here to document fact. these are the facts. We are here to ensure that all fact -- whether or not we may or may not individually "like" a thing and/or be in support of a thing --- the fact remains that a thing is a thing and that thing happened. We are not here to Censor information. We are not here to DELETE fact. In fact, censorship and the deletion of fact goes against everything that the Democracy of the Wikipedia Movement stands for.

I call for those three of you commenters who are here -- not to add to this Wikipedia Movement , but rather you are proving to takeaway from this non-governmental encyclopedic movement By We The People, For We The People -- for you @Bearcat and Co. are proven to clearly be invested in the censorship of relevant, valuable information from this Wikipedia Mission, by your unjust nomination to clear the record of a Black Canadian woman political figure and a public inspiration of promise for a young black girls across Canada *** Please see TVO report, Black women in Ontario politics — past, present, and future , a 2022 article addressing the role that Black woman candidates serves to inspire Black female youth to consider entering politics after seeing Black woman as politcal candidates that look like them. "According to Velma Morgan, chair of Operation Black Vote Canada —an organization that supports the election of Black people to public office — while Black women run at rates roughly equal to those of Black men, they still run in lower numbers compared to other demographics. ... "politics was often portrayed as a corrupt old-boys’ club, and as a Black woman, the idea of running seemed almost unimaginable to her ... "Supporting Black candidates doesn’t simply affect government — a range of diverse candidates will likely increase the participation of diverse voters, says Tolley: “There is a definitive link between the presence of a more diverse range of people in public life and the desire and willingness of a broader range of voters to get involved and participate.” Tolley says there is evidence that, when members of historically underrepresented groups begin to run for office and get elected in larger numbers, that encourages voter participation. And there’s also a spin-off role-model effect, she adds, pointing to the fact that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama increased the desire of young women and Black people to participate in politics."...

HumanWritesBook (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, "subject is a public figure" is not a notability claim in and of itself. People become notable by having

WP:NARTIST

for artists, and just throwing the words "public figure" around like a weapon doesn't demonstrate that at all. The number of Wikipedia articles that happen to have a name in them is also not, in and of itself, a notability claim that entitles the person to an article either. The notability test hinges on certain specific markers of achievement and sourcing, not on the number of times their name can be found in other articles.

This article, as written, has not demonstrated her notability as an artist at all, as you have not shown any evidence of GNG-worthy media coverage about her art. You are trying to stake her notability entirely on a non-winning candidacy for political office — but, again, having been a non-winning candidate is not grounds for a Wikipedia article in and of itself. People in politics get Wikipedia articles by winning the election and thereby holding the office, not by running as a candidate in an election they withdrew from. There is simply no valid argument for notability as a politician here, because people become notable as politicians by holding notable political offices, not by pulling out of the race two weeks before election day.

You're not going to save this article by posting long screeds to this discussion about how she's a "public figure", or by falsely accusing me of "bias" when I've never shown one second of bias whatsoever — if you want to save this article, then you need to find and show better

WP:NARTIST. The problem isn't that she's black, and the problem isn't that she's a woman — and if you want to accuse me of racism here, then check out who created our articles about Karen Chapman, Laurie Townshend, Virnetta Anderson, Myriam Magassouba, Traci Melchor, Kelly Fyffe-Marshall, Yasmine Mathurin and Alicia K. Harris. The problem is that a person (regardless of their gender or skin colour) has to hold office as a politician, not just run for office and then withdraw, to become notable as a politician — so to make Natasha Doyle-Merrick notable enough for a Wikipedia article, you need to establish that she's notable as an artist, not as a politician. Bearcat (talk) 02:12, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Electoral history of Jitendra Chaudhury (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

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly
  Talk to my owner:Online 00:18, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, History, Lists, and Tripura. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:17, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Duplicate of content at Jitendra Chaudhury#Electoral history. No need for separate article. Obi2canibe (talk) 10:30, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Agree with Obi2canibe, already includes in electoral history of Jitendra Chaudhury, not need to have separate article for it. VortexPhantom🔥 (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Roupas (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 turns out a nomination I made a decade ago was never completed. This is my effort to complete it. This article states that Lee Roupas was a local elected official and a political staffer. It was created by a user whose only other contributions were for Roupas, a political ally of Roupas, and a political opponent of Roupas.

Lee Roupas was a local elected official as the township committeeman elected in the Republican primary amongst Palos Township residents (an electorate of 3,053 voters) and then later chosen among the 80 committeemen to be the county party chairman. While local officials are neither notable or not notable, the bar requires meeting a 10-year historical significance test that Roupas does not meet. Nor did anything of note happen that would warrant him getting an article for it happening.

The article also covers his political staffer roles. The use of vague terms like "staff" are meant to hide his title for the 2004 Republican National Convention was "assistant to the director for communications." This was not a notable role nor are hired mid-level roles for state parties notable roles. We often remove state party chairs. Given the political chapter of his life has largely ended and that he has since he has moved to a neighboring county to be an assistant state's attorney (this would be hired staff not an elected role or political appointment), his article now reads as masking the lack of notability via building a biography. Mpen320 (talk) 23:56, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Illinois. Shellwood (talk) 00:36, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Mpen320 (talk) 00:53, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Sources seem to be about a political staffer, nothing notable. I can't find any articles about this person. Not sure what the AfD in 2011 was about, I suppose we had different notability standards then. Oaktree b (talk) 02:05, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply. For context, the first AfD ended in "no consensus" after one keep vote and after relisting resulted in a single addition vote for weak keep. A total of 3 users participated and contributed a few sentences in total. As the deletion stream for politics demonstrates, such an AfD would be relisted for a second time if done today. There was a second nomination that was a botched creation by me when I was less familiar with AfDs. In retrospect, I think making a 3rd nomination instead of trying to recreate the 2nd nomination page was an error on my part since it will create the illusion that there have been two discussions.--Mpen320 (talk) 17:41, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, The few sources that give
  WP:GNG. Mekomo (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Reply. What sources offer SIGCOV about his legal career? Everything in here is local coverage about a local figure. Let's review the citations: his middle initial in a legal directory, a student newspaper about a
  WP:RUNOFTHEMILL student council race, a self-published letter to the editor to a political blog, three paragraphs in a local newspaper about a local appointment reserved for his political party, a quote given in a North Carolina newspaper about a referendum of which he is not even tangentially the subject, public statements as the president of a statewide niche occupational group that would not pass what is laid out at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) at least one of which is self-published. I also did a newspaper search before nominating this yesterday and found nothing that says his legal career is any more notable than any other attorney in a local prosecutor's office.--Mpen320 (talk) 17:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Delete - I don't see significant coverage. Reasonable people can disagree. But as a local Political Party official, he objectively fails NPOL. Bearian (talk) 22:36, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lan Fu (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)

Negative undersourced BLP. Most of the article text is a

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Crime, and China. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:35, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In response to David’s comments:

• I added 3, not 2, refs including a NY Times front page article
• News and newspaper searches turned up more out there.
• The South China Morning Post article is exclusively about Lan Fu’s troubles
• When searching for refs, add Xiamen mayor to filter out other people with that name.
• This was my edit summary when removing the PROD: ” remove PROD. Notable but the tagged concern remains: this may be more about the _alleged_ kidnapping of his son, Lan Meng, by Chinese authorities in Australia as a hostage for Lan Fu's return. We don't have a Lan Meng article”
• This article is likely not a BLP since all the refs said LAN Fu was sentenced to death 2 decades ago as I noted in another edit summary. (There’s no lingering on Chinese death rows).
• WP:NPOL: Xiamen
  has over 5 million inhabitants; it’s larger than every North American city except NY and larger than any city in the EU.
• Re not adding footnotes to go with the refs: I’d already spent 60+ minutes doing the
  WP:BEFORE
  and I was late for lunch
  • I tagged the article with an
    inline
    template and moved on.

I encourage others to look at the existing refs and what else is out there. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's best to cover this as a biography article, but the scandal itself and his involvement is covered in several books [4] [5] [6] for just a few, there are many more. He was a very major player in this scandal and he was a public figure that was convicted so at the very least his name should redirect somewhere. Xiamen is a city of 5 million so there's also probably coverage of him as a mayor in Chinese. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:47, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per my comments above as well as PARAKANYAA‘s. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:09, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect: or merge to an article about the corruption scandal. The NY Times article is about a bigger scandal, Fu is mentioned briefly, archive here [7]. The SCMP source is probably better [8] (archived copy), but they both deal more with the scandal than about the individual. I suppose Fu could be notable, but there is a decent amount of sourcing about the corruption trial/event (even the books cited a few comments above mention more about the event than about this person, who is only mentioned). Oaktree b (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Oaktree b Well, you say redirect, but we don't have any article to redirect to. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  There's likely sourcing in Mandarin, the scandals were probably the only thing dramatic enough to make it to Anglophone printing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:20, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  We'd have to create the article I suppose. We have at least enough for a stub. Oaktree b (talk) 03:40, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I suggest we keep this until we have a stub to merge it with. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:22, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Redirect to

While the article mentions she is the first woman and first Native American to be a district attorney for two specific counties. Johnston Murray served as a Governor decades prior. Alice Robertson, Bessie S. McColgin, and Lamar Looney all held office in the 1920s. She was predated by a number of female local politicians as well. This assumes it is true. While I do not believe Kalyn Free would lie, the citation for the first is self-published and I have found nothing at NewsBank to serve as a nonprimary source. She could be mistaken.

In an effort to see if Free's legal career meets GNG, I reviewed the informal list provided by User:Bearian and have found nothing to establish GNG is met here. She was the President of the Native American Bar Association in 1998. Given their more recent 990s on ProPublica's website, I'm not sure that is notable enough to move her towards meeting GNG. This article has been marked with issues since May 2017. It's time to make a decision. Mpen320 (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, Ethnic groups, Law, and Oklahoma. Skynxnex (talk) 17:39, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per
  WP:BASIC but remove issues (even to a stub). I think there is enough sources from reputable organisations including this pub by the University of Oklahoma Press (already in the article) to demonstrate notability. Tamsier (talk) 23:28, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Follow up. Is this the entirety of the mention of her in the Voices from the Heartland: Volume II citation? It's a single paragraph in a 250-page book. I do see her name is mentioned on another page in the book, but that search does not allow me to preview beyond two lines of page 69.--Mpen320 (talk) 00:15, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That, in addition to the other sources cited is sufficient to confirm notability in accordance with our notability guidelines. It is not a one line mention as per the spirit of our guideline. We don't necessarily need a whole page dedicated to them for notability. That's why I say perhaps remove the issues and reduce to stub if necessary using the already reliable sources cited. In my opinion, that's the best way to go, but as far as notability, there are sufficient sources confirming notability, and at the very least, passed the BASIC test. Tamsier (talk) 17:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've been editing for fourteen years. I'm familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines and I do not believe she meets WP:BASIC based on being included as one of dozens of subjects in a book, even if that book was published by a university press. I belive I make my point why the rest of the coverage is either run of the mill or does not contribute to GNG and I'll just let the AfD play out.--Mpen320 (talk) 17:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. She is mentioned in the news pretty regularly. Yuchitown (talk) 02:10, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Free is pretty active in Oklahoma politics, especially in the tribal political campaign world. I would not have created an article for her because she does not meet WP:NPOL and is mostly a political figure, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm leaning delete. Would like to see a few more editors thoughts since I am less familiar with articles on non-electeds. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 15:14, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as meets
  WP:BASIC. I added a couple of references to article, and did some cleanup - still could use more work. Nnev66 (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Christopher Mellon (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 is an elegantly

• The essence of his biography is exclusively sourced to non-
  WP:RS sources like a show page for a History Channel Ancient Aliens
  -type fantasy show ("Unidentified! Inside America's UFO Investigation").
• This is legitimized through extensive REFBOMBing in which a dozen RS (e.g. Vice, The Guardian, etc.) are crammed into the article. However, on close inspection, each of these simply contain one sentence quotes from Mellon; no biographical detail or detail of any kind.
• This Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article is the only independent biographical treatment of him and it's two short and scanty paragraphs [9].

A standard

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Connecticut, Kansas, Maine, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:15, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kala Manickam (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 fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Singapore. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:30, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have not fully added onto the page yet - but there's a lot more sources from local media about her, hence there is certainly a lot more sources to add Aidanic (talk) 00:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -
  candidates for political office are not automatically notable, although a redirect might be appropriate to the election article. Bearian (talk) 23:43, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Jacklyn Frank (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: Politicians, Women, and Antigua and Barbuda. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:24, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Searching for Jacklyn or Jackie Frank, I find that she was one of two people who challenged the government of Antigua and Barbuda over the construction of the new airport, which started while residents of the island of Barbuda were evacuated to Antigua during Hurricane Irma. (See [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. The challenge went to the Privy Council in London. This is not currently mentioned anywhere - perhaps it could be included in the article Burton–Nibbs International Airport, or in the article on Barbuda#History#Modern history. I am not sure yet if there is sufficient coverage of Jackie Frank to warrant a stand-alone article - I'll keep looking. If not, an ATD could be to redirect or merge to Chairperson of the Barbuda Council (where she is named) or Barbuda People's Movement (where she is not currently named). RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:52, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Evans (Australian 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)

Subject fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Australia. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Deputy mayors are rarely notable and no inherent notability. Fails
  WP:NPOL. LibStar (talk) 04:12, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep Subject is notable beyond being Deputy mayor, as evident by the 16 sources on the page. Viatori (talk) 01:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, no clear indication this individual is notable or has been the subject of sufficient
  WP:SIGCOV. I checked each reference and I can't see any which significantly cover the individual or support notability. I was a little perplexed by the above "keep" voter referencing these "16 sources" as notability evidence, until I realised they are the article creator and source inserter. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:07, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:09, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: The coverage, such as it is, covers him in the context of his local elected office, not him personally. We would expect
  WP:NPOL. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:20, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep: Subject has currently launched his federal election campaign; he will soon receive substantial coverage in the media, even more coverage if he wins the Bendigo seat. Mr Sitcom (talk) 06:28, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  "he will soon receive substantial coverage in the media, even more coverage if he wins the Bendigo seat" is

  WP:CRYSTAL balling his future notability. LibStar (talk) 06:55, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Delete. I agree that the coverage of him as a local politician is
  WP:NPOL, but Ballarat is such a safe Labor electorate that it seems extraordinarily unlikely that he will win. Obviously if there is a major, major upset and he becomes an MP the page should just be restored upon request, but that seems unlikely enough that I don't think it's an argument against deletion. MCE89 (talk) 13:30, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Redirect - that will comply with the very strong consensus of NPOL, but also enable Re-creation if he wins election. Bearian (talk) 14:38, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If you're suggesting redirect, you have to actually state a target article you believe you be appropriate (and ideally a reason why it's suitable). Recreation from deletion is already possible in the event the individual becomes notable without needing to be an RD. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:40, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Trammell (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 author, professor, and political candidate. He received some national coverage in 2014 because he was the Democratic nominee in the race where Dave Brat primaried out House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, but not very much. The fact that news coverage of him completely dried up after the 2014 race shows he is not a notable person. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. It is clear that he does not merit inclusion for his political activity which consists of run of the mill party activism, the 2014 US House election, and a respectable overperformance in a special election earlier this year. This is why professors who run for office are always a tricky one for me. The article is clearly created due to a candidacy, but they might qualify for their professional work. The Mount St. Mary's University directory says that he is at present a Department Chair (which is not to say that Department Chair shares a definition with "chair" at Wikipedia:Notability (academics)). Ultimately, I think this will need to be judged with Wikipedia:Notability (academics) with no regard as to his candidacies. He has a bibliography at Amazon which is NOT self-published works. He also has a number of results on Google Scholar, EBSCO Host, and JSTOR pending verification it is the same Jack Trammell. The article needs an update and to be reframed away from his candidacies. I do hope to have a formal vote before the close of this AfD, but I'm in "weak keep" to "keep" territory at the moment.--Mpen320 (talk) 20:51, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. I'm of the mind that his career in academia does not meet
  WP:GNG. This is still more of an edge case than most articles created due to candidacies.--Mpen320 (talk) 02:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete. I did a search for reviews of his books on Google, Proquest and Google Scholar and came up with nothing usable for
  WP:GNG pass. MCE89 (talk) 13:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete. I would have expected someone with eight books to pass
  WP:PROF#C1 but although he has a couple of moderately well cited publications (126 citations on Google Scholar for "Postsecondary students and disability stigma" and 104 for "The impact of academic accommodations on final grades") they weren't enough to convince me. And obviously NPOL is out. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:06, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Mehdi Golshani (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's no indication of notability as per

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Xpander (talk) 18:47, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:52, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep,
  WP:VAGUEWAVE and completely erroneous. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  @David Eppstein. As for #C5 I couldn't find any independent sources for the distinction claim. As for #C2 how is "winner of a course program" and a "former judge" notable? As for #C3 it has hundreds of members most of which are not notable. So I don't think it passes WP:PROF as suggested. Xpander (talk) 21:22, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're missing the point. Why would you nominate a former member of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution for deletion when you say yourself that it's enough for NPOL? People who are notable need only be notable for one thing; even if you don't believe he is notable as an academic, notability as a politician is enough. For that matter, he's also likely not notable as an athlete (because we have no record of any athletic accomplishments) nor as a musician (likewise); do you think that should be a valid rationale to delete someone notable as a politician? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:03, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @David Eppstein I certainly respect your points. The issue with SCCR is that it is not a de jure legislative body, and if it is, it is not a common one, i.e. as compared to the US, UK etc. where the only legislature is the Congress/Parliament/Assembly. On their website they mention:

    The duties of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution can be divided into three areas: policymaking, regulation development, and supervision^[1].

    So it doesn't say lawmaking specifically, although it is mentioned in their by-law, that in case of needing law-changes they can ask the corresponding body to provide the necessary arrangements:

    Article 32 - If the Supreme Council resolution requires a law, regulation, or resources to be implemented, the matter will be sent to the head of the relevant authority or the highest official of the relevant body for legal procedures to be carried out, in order to provide the necessary arrangements.^[2]

    So maybe it could be interpreted as an executive body rather than a legislative one? That's why I said probably. Some editors have rejected the notability claim based on membership of this body. So the rationale was to reach as clear a consensus as possible. Xpander (talk) 07:01, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:30, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• It might do to revisit some tacit assumptions, David Eppstein. I found a potted biography preceding the main interview in Richardson & Slack 2005 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFRichardsonSlack2005 (help), and whilst it has degrees, awards, and books it has no mention of membership of that organization. The claim to membership was not in this article for the first 10 years of its life, only being added without source nor edit summary in 2017. It's not even made in Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, which merely claims, with zero sourcing, membership of a predecessor organization. Is the whole back-and-forth above based upon assuming as a given a claim that is not actually true? Certainly, even with the assumption, what the status of the SCCR is is irrelevant, as the (unsourced!) claim is that this person was a member of an appointed council of university professors in the Cultural Revolution HQ that preceded the 1984 foundation of the SCCR. Uncle G (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Richardson, Mark; Slack, Gordy, eds. (2005). "Mehdi Golshani: The Ladder To God". Faith in Science: Scientists Search for Truth. Routledge. pp. 121 et seq.
    ISBN 9781134516568
    .

• @Uncle G, The SCCR website, cites them as a former member, although the source is in Farsi/Persian. Xpander (talk) 22:46, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Lack of any notability whatsoever - prior print sources were bogus and unverifiable. Biased and POV statements littered throughout the article and the subject has flaunted said article on social media (facebook) many times. Large chunk of contributions to the article are from suspicious anonymous IP addresses that have only edited that page, as well as Guy Schwartz's own wikipedia account. Subject has not established notability and this page should be deleted. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:08, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Politicians, Journalism, Television, New Jersey, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Well, the article is unsourced, so that's of no help. I don't find anything for sourcing. Could be notable, but the lack of any kind of sourcing isn't helpful. Could be a hoax or an LLM article for all I know. Could likely speedy this. Oaktree b (talk) 14:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment is the nominator the ip who removed the references which are shown here on the basis that they were bogus such as the Houston Press?. However, I did find this piece in the Houston Press here so maybe they weren't as bogus as is claimed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep also found these other Houston Press articles about him here, here,here, here, here, and here. Going by this evidence the other references removed such as Billboard may be genuine as well, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  For the record, yes I am the user who called the Houston press in an attempt to independently verify the articles he cited on his own wikipedia page - none of those print articles existed according to them.

  Your first link to houston press is talking about MARTY schwartz, not Guy Schwartz - Marty is a youtuber with infinitely more notoriety.

  Of the rest of the articles you linked, guy schwartz is the main subject of only TWO of those articles - and not to mention, they are all by the same publication. Which per WP:GNG - "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability."

  The only cited source within the entire article that I could find that had any direct ties to guy schwartz was yet another Houston Press article from 2007 entitled "South By Due East↵Racket heads for Austin as Guy Schwartz and M. Martin bicker over the history of a local festival" and it was incorrectly cited for a statement that claimed they have been running said festival since 2003 - which the article mentions nowhere. Thus why I pulled it from the article.

  Perhaps Guy Schwartz could write a new wikipedia page about himself with info from those two articles that he is the subject of, appropriately citing things that are within those articles for the information therein. But the article as it stands is a plethora of wild unsupported claims - such as claims of a 2016 presidential campaign that are based in nothing but fantasy. Claiming he toured with Duran Duran, Todd Rundgren and Huey Lewis.

  If Guy Schwartz was truly notable, then one would think he would manage more than a couple articles in Houston Press about his band. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Also, the Billboard references I confirmed were bogus through online archives of those issues he claimed he was in.

  It also doesnt change the fact that none of those articles you linked were cited within the page. Had they been, this may have been a different story. Albeit the issue still stands: Per WP:GNG "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." Brandonac4473 (talk) 10:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, I've removed the Marty Schwartz reference. Agree more sources are required, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you agree more sources are required for notability, then please consider changing your recommendation to delete. Brandonac4473 (talk) 03:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly remove the bold in your request as it might be considered a !vote and it is assumed that nominators are generally in favour of deletion and cannot !vote. ◇Not sure it is appropriate to ask a voter to change their suggestion the way you did, but maybe that’s not an issue. -Mushy Yank. 18:22, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies - unbolded that word.

They can obviously do whatever they want, but I figured asking them to reconsider their vote would be appropriate considering that they now agree with the basis of my issue with the article to begin with - that more sources are needed. Brandonac4473 (talk) 20:20, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not yet fully convinced that additional sources do not exist so am sticking with my keep vote pending further evidence, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Houston Chronicle has bits of coverage about him; including this presenting him as "an icon of the Houston scene". -Mushy Yank. 00:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(and same media: https://www.chron.com/entertainment/music/article/guy-schwartz-new-jack-hippies-1979508.php (based on an interview)+ or this (short/similar to first and with similar appraisal, "a Houston institution"); this interview at Rag Radio (with an extensive presentation) (see

WP:INTERVIEWS, an essay) can serve is this is kept to expand and verify. So that imv, he might meet one or two of the inclusion criteria as defined in the guideline about WP:Notability (music), namely:

"Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself"

(excludes interviews) and/or, more likely:

"Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city"

Houston is a city. GS, at 73, seems to be listed among the most prominent Americana musicians of its local scene. Ergo (weak) keep? If kept, the article, currently tag-bombed, should be cleaned up. -Mushy Yank. 00:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Do any of these articles you linked support the plethora of claims made throughout the article?

This is why my attempts to verify them were so exhaustive. There are no credible sources for him having ran a 2016 presidential campaign, no credible sources for having toured with Duran Duran or Huey Lewis.

He might've passed

WP:GNG

if those articles were properly cited within the article but they weren't cited at all.

And Houston Chronicle calling his band an "icon" is a stretch particularly when their latest "music video" has 48 views on youtube. link

Houston Chronicle is open for business btw for paid promotions. Brandonac4473 (talk) 04:38, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even if notability is established,

WP:NDELETE

still says a wikipedia article must cite sources for whatever information it presents - regardless of notability.

The entirety of the article is filled with unverifiable claims. He still doesn't pass

WP:NDELETE even if he is truly notable. Brandonac4473 (talk) 09:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Feel free to fix it, then and remove everything you think is inappropriate (please do not WP:BLANK

the page, though). As for the idea that a page about a "truly notable subject" should (or even could) be deleted because the page has no sources cited, although sources exist (and in the case of an/this AfD, especially if sources are presented!!!!), I am very sorry, but: ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Just read

WP:SNG may be kept, depending on the case. Best, -Mushy Yank. 10:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Alright, so you disagree with

WP:NDELETE

, thats fine.

Do you think Guy Schwartz meets

WP:SIGCOV

?

A brief mention in a list of other houston musicians seems like a trivial mention. Brandonac4473 (talk) 22:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: fails

WP:N. The phoney 2016 presidential campaign with no citations to back it up says everything to me. Nominator appears to have tried to independently verify the print articles thoroughly. My own searching of “Guy Schwartz” on the internet doesnt produce much either, except for his wiki page. Non-notable. Brenae wafato (talk) 21:56, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

• Comment found this here about his supposed 2016 Presidential bid but he doesn't seem to have made the ballot according to official records, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so this guy connected with me on a site called ome.tv and one of the first things he told me to do was check his wikipedia page, trying to tell me he was famous. i googled him and literally this was the only thing i found on him. given that... seems like he shouldnt have a wikipedia page LOL. he has no followers or coverage anywhere else.

i saw the notification at the top of his article inviting me to leave an opinion..

so i'd say delete but i also dont know how wikipedia works. but this guy is not famous or notable and definitely shouldnt have a wikipedia page if he just goes around telling random people to check it out and has no real coverage anywhere else lmao. 24.27.40.108 (talk) 05:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I mentioned how he flaunts his wikipedia article on his facebook page, its clear he uses the article as a trophy - so this doesnt surprise me that he is telling strangers on the internet to go check it out. Brandonac4473 (talk) 22:08, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

this guy did the same thing to me!!! he was all bragging about being famous and having a wikipedia page and i was like “dude… theres a thing right there that says your page is about to get deleted” and he was like “WHAT?!?” and disconnected 😂😂 70.113.49.149 (talk) 04:41, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Need more input from other experienced editors
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This seems like an easier call than indicated by some of the discussion here. Fails GNG and RS criterion and should be deleted. Go4thProsper (talk) 20:19, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  And yet it does seem more complicated than that, because there are reliable sources and he might meet the specific guideline for musicians. -Mushy Yank. 09:24, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  None were in the article. The only one was incorrectly cited. He surely doesn't meet

  WP:SIGCOV. His band releasing an album in an article with 20 other bands is a trivial mention. Him flaunting the wikipedia article on social media and apparently telling strangers about it on chat sites is a major red flag that he isnt notable. Brandonac4473 (talk) 22:10, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Comment As Mushy Yank has noted, notability does not depend on the sourcing in the article, but on whether sourcing exists. In this case, looking for reviews of his albums seems like a useful thing to do. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete absolutely this guy is not famous or notable AT ALL. he pulled the same thing with me on ome.tv that the person above mentioned. bro is literally going around the internet showing off his wikipedia page yet he doesnt know its about to get deleted??? 😂 ive met famous people and they NEVER bring up their wiki page to brag about it lmao. yet that is apparently all this guy does. 70.113.49.149 (talk) 04:45, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Norachit Sinhaseni (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)

Ambassadors are not inherently notable, and I don't see evidence that this one passes

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Thailand. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:02, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The article is quite incomplete. After his ambassadorial posts, he was Permanent Secretary for Foreign Affairs, then spokesman of the 2014 junta's Constitution Drafting Committee, and later a representative of Thailand to the Permanent Court of Arbitration. He also had an executive position in Centara and some other companies. But there's not much in-depth coverage. There's an interview in The Nation covering him as an individual, but it's an interview.[16] There's this Khaosod profile piece,[17] but it only lists his positions in résumé format. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:24, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. User:Paul 012, since you weighed in here, do you have an opinion on what should become of this article in a closure?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:53, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Liz: Based on policy I'd say it's a weak delete, but considering that the article creator has a pending unblock request I'd rather postpone a bit further to see if they have anything to say. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:16, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]