Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday June 8 (Sat) June 7 (Fri) June 6 (Thu) More...

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< June 07	June 09 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Jill Vernekohl

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Nothing since retirement. Google search yields nothing but wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Germany. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Thompson (figure skater)

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

Non-notable figure skater despite one national championship win (for Great Britain). Nothing since retirement. Google search yields nothing but wikis, scoring databases, and one article mentioning that the European Championships where he finished in 25th place were held at the same rink where he trained. Big whoop. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and England. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or redirect I deprodded this with the rationale "This should be merged or redirected, but there are several plausible targets and I don't know enough about the topic area to unilaterally decide which is best." and I stand by that comment. I oppose straight deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: What merge or redirect target article are you suggesting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prasads Multiplex

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

Borderline G11, no indication of notability or significance for this IMAX theater, Sourcing isn't of WP:ORG level depth Star Mississippi 12:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Organizations, and India. Star Mississippi 12:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Independent coverage in rather reliable sources, significant and in depth, about this multiplex, and backing the claim that it houses the biggest screen in India! (other sources claim it is one of the world's largest 3D IMax). So, yes, there are various indications of significance and notability and it seems to meet WP:GNG. A redirect to Culture_of_Hyderabad#Film is imv absolutely warranted anyway. Opposed to deletion. (G11? "exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles, rather than advertisements. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion." So basically, borderline G11 is not G11, if it was just that the tone and content may have been partially promotional, Afds are not for cleanup and given existing coverage, this potential issue was easily fixed; added 2 refs and trimmed the page but this can evidently be improved and expanded, thank you) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baalveer Returns

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

Can't see it passes WP: GNG. All available sourcing are just about the actors. Proposing MERGE to Baalveer or DELETE. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:The article "Baalveer Returns" has been supported by many reliable sources, including Mid Day, The Tribune India, Aaj Tak, Abp news and The Times of India as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Film/Indian_cinema_task_force#Guidelines_on_sources It seems like Twinkle1990 has a personal enmity with Baalveer, so they are trying to delete all Balveer- related articles.
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to Baalveer. Same here like Baalveer 3 and Baalveer 4 nomination. The sources do not have the quality and depth of coverage needed to warrant a page on this show. Fails WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 21:57, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Baalveer. Since the article is not passing, WP: GNG. M S Hassan (talk) 10:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please sign all comments in AFD discussions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nabhan family

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

No reliable sources to indicate that (1) this family has been covered as a family as opposed to individual members or that (2) the people name-checked in this article are actually part of the same family. Several sources are unreliable; a seemingly user-generated site with no named authors or sourcing information on family names, and the WP:USERGENERATED MyHeritage geneaology site. The remaining sources are primary sources or media profiles of individuals with this surname, but they give no coverage to the family or evidence of how (if at all) the individuals across Syria, Brazil, the United States and the Gaza Strip are related. Fails WP:GNG and, per WP:NOPAGE, there is nothing this page does that Nabhan cannot. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Brazil, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hazari Gonj Hamidia Fazil Madrasah

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

Sources do not demonstrate notability. Nothing indicates that this high school is notable in the article. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per @LibStar and @Vinegarymass911.

ADifferentMan (talk) 08:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NSCHOOL. LibStar (talk) 05:53, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Morgan Williams (footballer, born 2004)

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

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

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, England, and Wales. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 14:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - 5 appearances as a professional with ongoing career, there is coverage out there such as this and this, does not need deleting. Giant Snowman 14:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps drafitification? Anwegmann (talk) 20:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At the absolute most. Giant Snowman 20:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per whats on the article, sources above. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 10:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per @GiantSnowman. Svartner (talk) 19:07, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails GNG. I couldn't find any sigcov of him. The above sources are a routine match report and a routine transfer story. The "ongoing career" argument should officially go the way of NFOOTBALL. Articles are for things that pass GNG now not at some time possibly in the future. Dougal18 (talk) 13:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Keep - May not be much to the article but satisfies WP:GNG. MaskedSinger (talk) 08:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated Testing Framework

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

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question Is this article in no relation to test automation frameworks, to which I would say there is more GNG than what is presented in this? Conyo14 (talk) 16:19, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete @Conyo14: It appears that the article's subject is a specific collection of libraries for test automation. The concept behind test automation frameworks are covered on the existing page under a subheading. Given this, the specific collection of libraries present seem to fail WP:GNG. Manyyassin (talk) 06:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, I would have to agree then: Delete. Conyo14 (talk) 06:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Merge to NetBSD, if possible. I see a number of references to this test library - it seems to have significance. (Add "NetBSD" to the G-search to get relevant results.) However, it is not mentioned in the NetBSD article. Lamona (talk) 15:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Lamona: While NetBSD does use this software, and this is what this software was developed for originally, it is still a generic piece of software. I think the details shown on this page would be mostly irrelevant on the NetBSD page. Manyyassin (talk) 16:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unit.js

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

Fails WP:GNG. Cannot find reliable, secondary sources about the subject. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, only finding primary sources and instructions. The article currently is mostly code samples. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 23:59, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Order of battle for campaign of northern and eastern Honan 1938

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

Identical subject and content to Order of battle for campaign of northern and eastern Henan 1938, but with the Wade-Giles romanization of Henan ("Honan"). Can be safely turned into a redirect. SilverStar54 (talk) 23:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, China, and Japan. SilverStar54 (talk) 23:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. This is baffling. The same editor, User:Asiaticus, created the "Honan" version on 15 February 2007, and then created the "Henan" version on 2 April 2008? Did they forget they'd made one already and simply create a new version based on the same sources? There are slight discrepancies, but since the Henan version has better sourcing I favor keeping that one. Toadspike [Talk] 23:35, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect since this seems to be completely identical barring the romanization spelling Claire 26 (talk) 04:50, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:55, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeroen Geerdink

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

Non-notable darts player. No coverage beyond darts databases. Per WP:SPORTCRIT. SL93 (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Netherlands. SL93 (talk) 23:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wouldn't go quite so far as to say no coverage, as there's bits and pieces in Dutch regional and local media from 2014 when he went to Lakeside (Tubantia (newspaper): 1, 2; RTV Oost 1, Omroep Almelo (a municipal radio/tv network from Almelo) 1, and probably if I go digging I might find another piece or two like that), but yeah, nothing that comes even close to passing WP:GNG from what I can see, looks like it's all "routine coverage of local/regional person doing something (mildly) interesting". AddWittyNameHere 00:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your vote. It's great to have one, either keep or delete, from someone who knows the language. I ran an online translator, and I see that the first source is a primary interview, and the others look to be trivial coverage of him in relation to updates on the competitions. SL93 (talk) 00:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the others look to be trivial coverage of him in relation to updates on the competitions - more or less, with the note that these sources likely as not wouldn't even have reported on the competition if not for the fact that two folks from the Twente region (Geerdink and the more well-known Christian Kist) took part in it. Still, trivial coverage sounds about right. AddWittyNameHere 00:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Falls short of the GNG. gidonb (talk) 05:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Ruiz II

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

Chiefs of staff do not count as a political office for purposes of NPOL, and it doesn't seem like there is sufficient coverage to meet the standards of WP:BASIC unfortunately. Deprod by Clearfrienda, not sure which sources they were referring to, perhaps the AP? Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Arizona. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In cases where there is some substantial coverage I usually object with PRODs in case there's a chance they can be kept. In this case, there's this local 12news.com article and this ktar.com article which both go WP:INDEPTH. There are some less-significant mentions in this NYT article, this kold.com article, and this azcentral.com article. I'd lean towards delete but it's a close call. Clear friend a ^💬 16:16, 25 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!} 19:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree with Clearfrienda that the sources provided are not SIGCOV. The 12News source is good, but the rest are routine announcements and/or based on press releases. Toadspike [Talk] 07:59, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The NYT is a name-check, the KTAR is routine "hey, look at this guy who got elected" stuff. The c12 is more in depth but is rather fluffy and doesn't have the air of a researched piece - it sounds like a restating of an interview. Lamona (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andile Witbooi

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. I can't even confirm his unfortunate death in a reliable source. JTtheOG (talk) 22:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 22:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kaafir (Pakistani TV series)

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

I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage like this, this and this. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: could be reasonably redirected to the page about the director if the one-paragraph appraisal im Dawn Humayun Saeed’s negative role in Kaafir actually made one feel disgusted by his character. This drama proved how his star quality and ability to reach to the audience never fails. The good vs. evil; directed by Shahid Shafaat gave us the story Shahan Ali Khan (Humayun Saeed) who is living a dual life; in front of his family he pretended to be virtuous but resorted to his evil and malicious side when away from them. The twists were woven captivatingly into the narrative although the play did go a little over board with its bold dialogues and settings. ~~and this review (https://www.thequint.com/entertainment/hot-on-web/zee-5-kaafir-dia-mirza-mohit-raina)~~ for example ~~are~~ is not judged sufficient. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Mushy Yank, I'm fine with redirection. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Read the opening sentence, Zee 5's web series Kaafir is a historical drama that explores the inhuman situation of Pakistani prisoners in India. So it is a web series of Zee5, not related to ARY drama. Redirect is the way. 2A04:4A43:920F:F722:28B7:A2BE:8E49:C6C3 (talk) 19:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, 2A04:4A43:920F:F722:28B7:A2BE:8E49:C6C3, indeed, silly me. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per Mushy Yank provided source, also easily passes WP:NTV, broadcasted on national television channel ARY Digital. Libraa2019 (talk) 18:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Libraa2019, But NTV is an essay, not a policy. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Caution: Arguing with and sometimes just commenting on each individual who disagrees with you risks moving in a disruptive direction.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Saqib and Mushy. The Quint article is about a different web series and there is nothing in-depth in reliable refs. 188.30.176.151 (talk) 19:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Please provide a redirect target article if that is the option you are arguing for.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Saint George S.C. players

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

No evidence this list of self-selected players meets the WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Football, Lists, and Ethiopia. Let'srun (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Zero notability, a category for the players from this club is enough. Svartner (talk) 22:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 14:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 14:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is the top football team in Ethiopia, and is well sourced. I fail to see why WP:LISTN doesn't apply here. SportingFlyer T·C 02:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep—I tend to agree with SportingFlyer. I'm not sure how this can be see has having "zero notability" if it is the best football team in Ethiopia. It is also universally discussed "as a group or set" by nature, working it into the threshold of WP:NLIST. I think this falls under WP:BIAS to a large degree, as well. Anwegmann (talk) 04:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per SportingFlyer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Julia Kova

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

The significance of the person is not visible in WP: MUSIC. Among the links are her official website and social networks.--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 20:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Beauty pageants, Russia, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Doljești and Orbic

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

I could not find any sources to prove that these events took place in the dates mentioned, which would fail WP:NEVENT. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Moldova, and Romania. Shellwood (talk) 22:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cocobb8: the Romanian Wikipedia page for this article has source(s) by the looks of it. Are those sources sufficient for notability? (I don't know Romanian so not too sure myself). Cheers. Dan the Animator 00:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dantheanimator: perhaps? I'll leave it up to other to check that

. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 18:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pdftotext

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

Non-notable software per WP:N. SL93 (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am wondering if this could usefully be merged somewhere. BD2412 T 01:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
List of PDF software? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is probably the best bet. A section could be added on conversion software specifically, or on miscellaneous PDF software. It is mentioned in passing in a row in the "Linux and Unix" section of that list. BD2412 T 20:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add to List It seems to be one of those handy utilities. I see lots of references and I would not be surprised if there isn't more than one bit of software with this obvious name. Lamona (talk) 16:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marais Schmidt

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 22:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 22:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Polish raid on Kievan Rus' (1136)

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

WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, WP:PRIMARY, WP:GNG, WP:NPOV. Follow-up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bolesław II the Bold's expedition to Kiev (1076–1077). User:SebbeKg created this article on 18 February 2024, 4 days before he was blocked indefinitely for Adding poorly sourced content, false accusations of vandalism. We still need to clean up the rubbish he added, checking whether there is anything left of value, and throwing away the rest. Bolesław II the Bold's expedition to Kiev (1076–1077) was deleted on 27 May. Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135) was AfD'd previously, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135), resulting in no consensus. But Marcelus did the right thing by removing all informations referenced to primary sources, as obvious OR. I decided to WP:BOLDly turn it into a redirect to Wiślica#History, where I added 1 sentence to summarise the incident based on a source which Piotrus and Marcelus agreed was RS.

As for this article itself, it is clearly written completely from a point of view of later Polish chroniclers who invented lots of details out of their own volition, dramatising and exaggerating stories they had heard or read about. This whole text is basking in emotions of "revenge for Wiślica". Evidently, there was a Volhynian raid on Wiślica in 1135, but I have not been able to find any sort of "Polish" retaliation against "Kievan Rus" in the next year. It is striking that not a single toponym is mentioned in this article, except the vague " Entire communities surrounding the Principality of Volhynia". No standard history work on Kievan Rus' I consulted mentions this event. Not even the Kievan Chronicle, that has quite detailed entries for every year, says anything about 1135, let alone 1136. (There was a raging conflict between the Monomakhovichi of Kiev and the Olgovichi of Chernigov in the north and centre, but no hint of a conflict between Poles and Volhynians on the western edges of the realm). If there really was a frenzied massacre, sparing no Ruthenian soul in Volhynia in 1136, the Kievan Chronicle and modern literature would have talked about it. There is no reason for us Wikipedians to take the fanciful claims of later Polish chronicles at face value, especially from the hands of a now-blocked user with a poor record of using sources on this topic. NLeeuw (talk) 23:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Poland, and Ukraine. NLeeuw (talk) 23:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. First, I'll note that I reverted the de-facto blanking of Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135). There was no consensus to delete the article, so I find what happened since (Marcelus removal of 95% of the article, and then your redirecting it) to be against the outcome of the AfD. Feel free to start a new AfD for it if you desire (although note I've also modernized the article by adding the RS we found, which pretty much states the event might be a fabrication by old chroniclers... - but, IMHO, it is a notable topic).
Now, regarding the article nominated here. I do agree that the creator of this (these) articles was overly reliant on old primary sources. The article nominated here has only one footnote to a presumed modern source, and poorly formatted at that. I would be fine with this being redirected to the "Ruthenian raid...", if we can find a single non-historical mention of this event in modern RS. Otherwise, well, can't justify keeping this due to problematic sourcing to ~1000 year old chronicles whose authors clearly liked to invent history, not just record it :( I.e. in the current state, afer all I wrote, I guess I am not leaning to weak delete this one. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus Thanks for your input. I responded at length at Talk:Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135)#Historiography for discussion on the 1135 event. It is interesting, but complicated.

For the 1136 article, did you mean to say "I am *now leaning" instead of I am not leaning? NLeeuw (talk) 08:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nederlandse Leeuw Yes, I am leaning. Sorry, was writing while taking care of a baby :) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear from more editors on this one since the consensus is less than clear.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St. James Armenian Church

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

Unsourced article with no indication of notability. A BEFORE search finds nothing but run-of-the-mill local coverage of the church, and it's not a registered historic building. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Religion, Armenia, and Massachusetts. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021 English Channel disaster

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

The article concerns a single incident of the ongoing English Channel migrant crossings (2018–present) and does not need to have its own article. Firsttwintop (talk) 22:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, France, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (at least for now) - I could be wrong but it being the most deadly of these reported incidents makes it notable right? Maybe in the future if (heaven forbid) something else happens that may not ring true but right now it is. 2406:5A00:CC0A:9200:F885:F46D:3F46:5787 (talk) 06:14, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The main article notes the incident properly: "On 24 November, the deadliest incident on record occurred. An inflatable dinghy carrying 30 migrants capsized while attempting to reach the UK, resulting in 27 deaths and one person missing. The victims included a pregnant woman and three children.". It would therefore fortify the request for it to be deleted simply because it lacks notability and it is not news. It is not appropriate in the context of the main article to create a standalone article for this one incident. Firsttwintop (talk) 21:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to English Channel migrant crossings (2018–present). This information isn't useless, but it belongs in the article about the main subject. There's no reason to split off random pieces of the topic into their own articles. Firsttwintop, did you create an account just to nominate it for deletion? There's no rule against that, but it's unusual. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The information is already on the article, but I support the gist of the proposal. Firsttwintop (talk) 00:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Troy Stetina

AfDs for this article:

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

I nominated this before but it was closed as no consensus since there were no other participates. Same reasoning as before applies: fails WP:MUSICBIO and quite promotional. Can’t find any in-depth sources on the subject. The cited Washington Post article [1] is about the subject’s father, Wayne Stetina. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 21:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 21:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Indiana, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I suggest that, if nobody comes to support it, it should be considered as a prod. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. This subject is not notable enough for an article. Qflib (talk) 03:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. To be notable through publishing works on how to play guitar, we would need in-depth published reviews of those works, and I don't see them. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basanth Sadasivan

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

Minor coverage in mediocre sources, but doesn’t appear to meet the WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 21:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Travel and tourism, and Singapore. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 21:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: England and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. JohnInDC (talk) 23:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is only a little in the way of significant coverage, and it fails WP:NSUSTAINED. There was a small flurry of news within the first couple of months following his arrival in Tuvalu. Since then, he's had some exposure as a source of travel advice, including one article in which he's the sole focus, but these aren't coverage of him. Largoplazo (talk) 12:38, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Braden Olthoff

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

fails WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 21:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Baseball. Joeykai (talk) 21:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG with WP:SIGCOV at [[2]], [[3]], [[4]] and [[5]]. Let'srun (talk) 16:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CW 24 News

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

CW 24 News doesn't exist. Its existence is fabricated on several global Wikipedia and Wikiquote national pages, by two users (sock puppets or meat puppets) GQO and Beach Mirco Viejo and a few IP addresses (196.135.135.177, 154.187.210.6, 196.150.237.159, 196.135.169.232, 196.150.148.109, 154.189.72.22), since May 2024. Even the CW24News.com domain has only been established in April 2024 (for a newspaper that supposedly exists since 1973 and was co-founded by Anwar Sadat. All of the links and supporting info turned out to be nonsense. The cw24news.com website looks pretty real, until you see that it was created in Wordpress, and that the social media links are all phony (going to the template creator). Also: the Media Ownership Monitor doesn't show CW 24 News ownership by Egypt Media Group. Note also that there are a number of "CW 24 News" "logos" in Commons that seem to be completely made up by these perpetrators. I realize that this is cross-wiki spam, but I don't know how to easily make this into a cross-wiki "case". Any help in this respect will be appreciated. _W^\|/_haledad (Talk to me) 20:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Egypt. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, I actually created this article I added secondary sources and information from the memory sites of the attached site. Search in those formulas and see the result of this search -en- (CW24 News) --------------------search - ar - (سي دبليو 24 أخبار)

CW24 News (Arabic: سي دبليو 24 أخبار)

(GQO (talk) 23:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Delete possible hoax. The Egyptian cw24news dot com was created this year.[6] The domain name was previously an unrelated Bangladesh news site. The BBC's Egyptian media guide does not mention it.[7] The Library of Congress guide does not mention it.[8] The FeedSpot news aggregator does not list it.[9] The biography of Anwar Sadat: Visionary Who Dared does not mention it.[10] Anwar Sadat's autobiography In Search of Identity does not mention it, even though it does mention the unrelated al-Gumhuriah (The Republic) that Sadat founded and briefly edited in the 50s (p. 136).[11] Even if it is not a hoax, it would not meet the notability threshold without any coverage in WP:RS. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 00:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A note: view the source code of my post for html comments to see the archive.org link to the old website. Wikipedia's blacklist prevented me from including a linked url containing "CW24news.com". Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 00:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Obvious spam/hoax. And, imo, you can add Mahmushij and Paula Fenness to that list of sock puppets. MLTRock (talk) 02:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question. According to Wikidata there are a total of 11 Wikipedia and 3 Wikiquote pages across the languages. Looking at the history page of the Wikidata entry, some were removed early May and recreated afterwards. Is there an easy way to address all language versions? _W^\|/_haledad (Talk to me) 16:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete: Given that this is now a proved cross-wiki hoax, and the sock puppets have all been globally banned, I think this now qualifies for speedy deletion. _W^\|/_haledad (Talk to me) 17:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
? Who is the master account of this farm? Yann (talk) 15:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The Meta entry listed three possible master accounts: AZ112233, M_W_T_WMV, Ahmed_brens. _W^\|/_haledad (Talk to me) 16:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Really Cool Airlines

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

This was prod by Drmies as "Lousy sourcing full of announcements for something that may or may not exist a half a year from now." This is not notable, the sources are over a year old and the "airline" isn't even flying and the three sources for the proposed date are word for word (reads as if it was a PR). This can be undeleted if it ever gets off the ground. Bidgee (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Bidgee (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Thailand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and drmies's judgment on what's cool. tedder (talk) 03:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Cool or not, this is WP:TOOSOON. Not even in operation and references are churnalism. Wikipedia is not a promotional tool for future ventures. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete As per above. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:03, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elyria-Lorain Broadcasting Co.

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

Subject does not meet the WP:NCORP. Let'srun (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Radio, Companies, and Ohio. Let'srun (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Cannot find any significant coverage of this company per WP:ORGCRIT. It was the subject of an antitrust case in the 1960s that gets cited in future cases, but I can't even find any significant coverage of that case. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of awards and nominations received by Rashmika Mandanna

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

This article sets a bad precendent. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of awards and nominations received by Priyamani. Fails CFORK, NLIST this information could very easily be accommodated in the main article, there is no need for a stand alone list, has not been discussed as a group by independent non-promotional reliable sources. No need to delete this article, only merge it back to Rashmika Mandanna. The number of awards and nominations seem dubious here [12], might just be fan work. DareshMohan (talk) 19:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Rashmika Mandanna: Too soon and too short. Kailash29792 (talk) 20:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Awards, Lists, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mergeinto Rashmika Mandanna: no need for a separate article. PamD 10:55, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Rashmika_Mandanna#Awards_and_nominations. This do not have to be separate page. RangersRus (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bowdon Railway

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

I couldn't establish that it meets WP:ORG / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 19:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Georgia (U.S. state). Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A good amount of coverage in book and newspapers. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the article is in a sorry state, a quick search on Google books shows plenty of significant coverage, making this easily clear GNG (and most railroads do). I have added a reference and expanded the article slightly, I will likely continue this work in the next few days. There's enough to write a proper article here. Unfortunately there's only one of me and many railroads with sorry-looking articles on Wikipedia. Compare what Waycross Air Line Railroad looks like today with what it looked like before it was brought to my attention: [13]. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've added some sources and text as well. Mackensen (talk) 01:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phat mi Khorat

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Thailand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with List of Thai dishes: Individual recipe does not appear to need a standalone article, Google search does not provide deeper coverage beyond recipe and origin. Reywas92^Talk 04:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, per Reywas92. I agree with these points fully. Rrjmrrr (talk) 08:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shahid Siddiqui (politician)

AfDs for this article:

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

Recreated after soft delete. Still no evidence of meeting WP:NPOL * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Still nothing to establish notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and India. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Probably have enough for a basic article [14] and [15] are RS. What's used in the article now are primary sources. Oaktree b (talk) 19:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first one doesn’t really counter towards GNG for me. The second one I can’t assess right now and I don’t know why. The first one just isn’t enough for me to reconsider my !vote. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Crofts

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. There is some coverage of his resignation as a councillor but nothing independent about his political or professional career. Reads like a CV. Orange sticker (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and United Kingdom. Orange sticker (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cavalcade station

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

Couldn't find any reliable sources for this article, even newspapers as well. Fails WP:GNG and WP:VERIFY. I don't see how this article can be on this website. To me, this needs to be discussed. GoodHue291 (talk) 16:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found general mention of this station on travel websites but nothing that would qualify as a source for this article. It seems to violate WP:NRV. Garsh (talk) 18:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The other stations on this line seem to have similar sourcing/depth of content. Is there any particular reason you focused on this station specifically for this AfD? Jumpytoo Talk 21:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep without prejudice to re-nom by a non-sock and per Thryduulf. Jumpytoo Talk 20:45, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep without prejudice to a merger discussion for all the stations on the line. It makes no sense to treat one member of the set differently to the others, and especially deleting just one will seriously harm the encyclopaedia. Thryduulf (talk) 09:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While I strongly doubt this is notable, AfD filer is a sock and I'm inclined to say this should be closed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As @Garsh has expressed a good-faith recommendation to delete this can't be speedily kept for being a bad-faith nomination. Thryduulf (talk) 08:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an interesting AFD. It's a less of a surprise when there is an AFD for a small station closed for decades or that had infrequent service but this is an active light rail station in the United States with frequent service. That being said, I can find very little information about the station. I can't even find station area plans for this station or others. Looking at the map and the StreetView, it looks little more than a tram stop and there are vacant trash-filled lots across the street. This suggests to me that there likely is very little to know about the station. I would prefer that this AFD get bundled with other Red Line extension stations opened in 2013 which all appear almost identical. -Eóin (talk) 23:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep per Thryduulf, it makes no sense to delete this article and keep other near-identical ones for the other stations on the line. If somebody in good faith feels strongly enough to bring the full set of stations on this line to AfD (or likely more sensibly to propose merging) I'd not necessarily be against that. _└^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 18:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Hynds

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

Fails WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. Does not pass WP:BASIC either. Subject never held any NPOL-passable office. Generally fails notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Northern Ireland. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Förbundet Arbetarfront

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NORG. WP:BEFORE shows no results in modern Swedish media archives or on Google Scholar/Books. 7 newspaper entries on https://tidningar.kb.se/ which I can't access in full but the text that is visible suggests mostly trivial mentions of arranging meetings and similar. AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Sweden. AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcin Trębacki

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dominika Polakowska

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No other sources have been found to change my analysis from the previous discussion. Article still fails WP:NSKATE and WP:GNG. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aneta Kowalska

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Some limited coverage here, here, and here, which I think is evidence of further offline coverage. JTtheOG (talk) 22:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandra Maksimova

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Belarus. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandr Levintsov

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, Poland, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandr Anichenko

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Azerbaijan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 14:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Programme level

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

Ambiguous term, unsourced and I found it difficult to find good sources to add. Boleyn (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Radio, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bridges construction

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

I declined User:Flemmish Nietzsche's speedy ("dup of Bridge") because it's more of a subtopic/content fork. However, as it stands this article does not actually make the case for being a coherent topic. The parent article is not large and this child article appears to have few if any cites that support its topic claims (historical facts, engineering opinions, etc.). The cites are for small specific details. There are too many different types of bridges, each with own construction method, and each already has its own article. And I agree bridges already has both well-cited history and a well-linked summary-style of the types. DMacks (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As the nominator for deletion under A10. Of course not all the content is an exact duplicate, but it appears to be a translation from the Russian article, and "Bridges construction" is essentially the same topic as bridges, so I thought A10 would work here under WP:SNOW of this ever being a keep at AfD. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 14:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The same editor as created the enwiki article is the only substantive contributor to that ruwiki article. That's not a license problem. DMacks (talk) 15:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not saying it is a license issue, rather it's an issue with the ruwiki contributor trying to push their translation of their russian article onto enwiki when we already have an article on bridges, which again is essentially the same thing as "bridges construction". Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 15:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Obviously not disputing that aspect. DMacks (talk) 16:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the "Bridge" page there is no information about the methods and stages of constructing bridges. Therefore, the "Bridges construction" page is planned primarily to describe various technologies for creating bridges, and these two pages will not compete with each other. VasilijB (talk) 18:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Engineering, and Transportation. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Having something on this seems a good idea. Not sure what we have is it. But not sure it's unsalvageable either. Hyperbolick (talk) 01:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge (selectively) into bridge. The overlap is too great. gidonb (talk) 01:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (or Merge any previously unused reliable sourcing into Bridge). Agree with DMacks view ("many different types of bridges, each with own construction method, and each already has its own article"). Paul W (talk) 09:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ATG (autophagy acronym)

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

I'm unsure of the need for a separate article on an acronym which offers nothing more than a few lines of basic non-encyclopedic synthesis. Could be covered in Autophagy instead. X (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete First off, it's not even an acronym. Second, a search for ATG leads to a disambig page that has listings for autophagy and autophagy-related genes and proteins, which seems much more specific than anything this page offers. Third, as the nom said, the article is essentially about the use of the "ATG" shorthand in biology, which isn't anything that can't be mentioned in a half-sentence in the gene or autophagy articles. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 14:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename It is certainly not an acronym, but that was the first thing that popped into my head when I was struggling to create this page. "ATG (abbreviation)" would be better, but I am open to other suggestions. I frequently have found the abbreviation ATG commonly used in autophagy literature meaning "autophagy-related" referring to genes Regulation of autophagy gene expression or to proteins Autophagy and innate immunity or both. I modified the ATG disambiguation page to reflect that fact. The ATG (autophagy acronym) gave the disambiguation page a Wikipedia page to go to for verification and peer-reviewed literature examples, whereas formerly there was none. My modification of the ATG disambiguation page improves the situation, but I think Wikipedia should have a page justifying and giving examples of the abbreviation "ATG-related" which can be confusing in the autophagy scientific literature, especially when it is not explained in an encyclopedic source. --Ben Best:Talk 23:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I have linked this article to a Wikipedia page using ATG to mean autophagy-related and was planning to look for other Wikipedia pages using ATG with this meaning.--Ben Best:Talk 06:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - I have created the page ATG (abbreviation) and marked the page ATG (autophagy acronym) for speedy deletion. --Ben Best:Talk 16:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Autophagy. Anything that's autophagy-related is probably already mentioned in its article, so the content in this article should be moved to a new section of the autophagy article to clarify how the names of genes and proteins are related to it. Afterwards, this page should be kept as a redirect. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 16:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just noticed how the Molecular biology section of the article mentions it in its first paragraph; the content can be merged there. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 17:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd like to let everyone know that I've blanked and redirected ATG (autophagy acronym) after the author requested for the page to be deleted and I moved the AfD discussion as well; the link at the top of this AfD now links to ATG (abbreviation), which has the same content as the original page. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 17:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Front for the Liberation of the Golan (3rd nomination)

Nullarbor (demoparty)

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources (including by searching in Trove). Also, the Nullarbor website had a section for media coverage; many of the sources listed there either aren't reliable, don't provide significant coverage, or aren't independent (media/press releases). A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 12:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Video games, Visual arts, Events, Computing, and Australia. toweli (talk) 12:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties as an WP:AtD. --Mika1h (talk) 13:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This is actually the 2nd AfD, the previous one was in 2007: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nullarbor (demo party). --Mika1h (talk) 13:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Academic dress of universities in Queensland, Australia

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

While certainly interesting, not encyclopaedic and not notable. WP:NOTDATABASE 5225_C (talk • contributions) 12:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Australia. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 12:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Australia. Owen× ☎ 12:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOTGUIDE. Of zero interest and encyclopaedic value outside the universities. LibStar (talk) 21:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second inauguration of Nayib Bukele

AfDs for this article:

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

The maintenance tag claiming sources exist. However, most of the sources are not about the inauguration but the current affairs of nation that is covered in 2024_Salvadoran_general_election#Presidency_of_Nayib_Bukele and Nayib_Bukele#Presidency, i.e. [16]. There is nothing much at least in the English sources about the preparation of the event, what transpired during the event, and any post event celebrations, with exception of a bombing plot, and a protest in Chicago, both of which can be easily tucked into 2024_Salvadoran_general_election#Aftermath. – robertsky (talk) 12:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of El Salvador-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 12:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Politics. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy redirect/merge to Nayib_Bukele#Presidency. Don't make articles just for the sake of making articles. Inaugurations do not automatically need a standalone page. Reywas92^Talk 17:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an acceptable outcome in lieu of an outright deletion. – robertsky (talk) 04:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I haven't even delved into the Spanish sources but there is lots of WP:RS WP:SIGCOV in English alone, including of the event itself (Deutsche Presse-Agentur, AP, Al Jazeera), guests (MercoPress, Politico, Deseret News, Xinhua), international reactions (AP), plus the bomb plot (AP, Reuters) mentioned by the nominator. I'm sure there's even more in Spanish. Now that the event has happened, there's plenty of coverage to support a standalone page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the sources you have raised here:
- Deutsche Presse-Agentur, AP, Al Jazeera these are some of what I referred to when I wrote most of the sources are not about the inauguration but the current affairs of nation. If it is about the event itself, I would expect significant coverage about the event itself and not a majority of the content of each source about the state of affairs in the country, his management style, and the challenges ahead for him or the country.
- Guest list is the least of consideration for notability of the event. Notability is not inherited, nor this page should be a guest list as well, which some had tried to turn this page into (see WP:NOTDIR and also WP:INDISCRIMINATE). Nothing in the sources here (MercoPress, Politico, Deseret News, Xinhua) is of anything significant about the event except that 'X had attended".
- (AP) that is an reaction to the president's management in his term (in my opinion, might be worthy of a split from his main article if extended further).
- bomb plot. further details than what has been provided currently is required. otherwise by itself, it is a news report.
– robertsky (talk) 00:45, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like any good news source, the coverage will situate the event in its context. In fact, under WP:NEVENTS, such sources should be "in-depth coverage [that] includes analysis that puts events into context." Each article I cited devotes several paragraphs (up to half the article) specifically to inaugural events and the rest to the context. As for guests, inauguration pages on WP almost universally cover international guest attendance. See (as just a few examples) Inauguration of Lai Ching-te, Second inauguration of Goodluck Jonathan, Inauguration of Bernardo Arévalo, and so forth. (And every source I provided is WP:RS for this kind of news and provides significant coverage of the attendance and the dynamics around it.) Finally, the alleged bomb plot was part of the preparations for the inauguration and belongs in such an article. Unless you're trying to say that presidential inaugurations are inherently non-notable topics, in which case you need to propose an SNG, it's clear that this subject clears the tests imposed by WP:GNG and WP:NEVENTS. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need for a separate SNG. The entire WP:NEVENTS has to be taken into consideration, not just the coverage of the event. Coverage is a given, after all it is a planned event directly after the election:

Points to consider:
Is there a lasting effect from the inauguration as an event? None so far.

Is there a significant impact of the inauguration as an event? None so far.

What's the depth of the coverage of the event? Surface level. What was the planning? What happened during the inauguration? Who/What agencies were involved in the planned? Why was there a change in the venue? What was said during the inauguration. As argued before, the analysis is already written for in the general elections page, and the inauguration is the result of the general election. There is no need for a separate article as such.

What's the duration of the coverage? Immediate after the event, no further news coverage that I can find in the 7 days since the inauguration.

What's the diversity of sources? Diverse but same set of talking points.

And with respect to inauguration as a planned event. Is the coverage a routine coverage? Yes. One would expect major news outlets to cover a planned national level event as part of their routine news cycle.

As for the other inauguration pages, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. But if I may, these pages are likely going to be evaluated in the same manner for AfD. – robertsky (talk) 04:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: How much has the article really changed since its previous iteration? I still do think this was recreated by a certain LTA block evading, though I can't say for certain. jellyfish ✉ 04:01, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The infobox remained the same; all sections you see now were there as well, unfilled; the international guests section was unfilled (naturally, since it was before the event).

This is the lead in the last deleted revision for evaluation:

The Second inauguration of Nayib Bukele as president of El Salvador will take place on Saturday, 1 June 2024, in the El Salvador Chamber of Deputies in San Salvador. The inauguration will mark the commencement of the four-year term of Bukele as president and Félix Ulloa as vice president. The inauguration will mark the formal culmination of Bukele's presidential transition that began after he won the 2024 Salvadoran presidential election held on 4 February 2024. – robertsky (talk) 04:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luis Hernández (footballer, born 1992)

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

Potentially fails WP:GNG here. I found him on Transfermarkt and Soccerway but these don't count towards notability. I found some brief mentions in La Brecha, Pasión Rojiblanca and ESPN but none of this can be considered significant coverage. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 17:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:14, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malek Rahmati

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

I first saw this article when I was searching about the 2024 Varzaqan helicopter crash. I prefer the information of this article in other websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by anonymous (talk • contribs) 11:34 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per our guidelines on notability of politicians, province-wide officeholders are notable. Moreover, there is adequate RS coverage of the subject. Davey2116 (talk) 17:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Why not merge his article into the article containing the list of current Iran governors-general? That would be a better aternative. (talk) 10:15, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He was the governor-general of a province; that alone combined with coverage in sources makes him notable. Also what does I prefer the information of this article in other websites even mean? We don't get articles deleted because of our personal preferences. Keivan.f^Talk 18:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What I meant when I said I prefer the information of this article in other websites, I meant by either websites outside Wikipedia or the Persian language Wikipedia. (talk) 13:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The OP's nomination rationale doesn't make sense. There are plenty of sources in the article to demonstrate notability. Toughpigs (talk) 17:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isochem

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

The company is a wholly owned subsidiary PMC Group International which does not have a wiki page or non-primary articles on it by reliable publications. of https://www.chemanager-online.com/en/news/pmc-buys-isochems-pharma-business Mixmon (talk) 11:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and France. Owen× ☎ 12:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No valid reason to delete. You have not proved that Isochem itself fails GNG. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 19:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep (but improve): Some news about this company could be found, mostly dealing with its buyout by PMC: [17], [18]. That might be just barely enough to meet WP:NCORP. I don't read/speak French, so someone who is able to parse French sources might be able to vet sources better than me. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 00:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karsten Henriksen

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

Fails WP:NPERSON. Non-notable individual, run-of-the-mill educational administrator. No claim of notability (except perhaps for the Platinum Jubilee Medal, but even that was given to 420 000 individuals worldwide). WP:PROMO, reads like a WP:RESUME. Potentially violation of WP:COI as the editor is a single topic editor, and claims to own the copyright of a picture of the subject. Melmann 11:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but edit. This article needs substantial trimming and rewriting to change it from a resume to a Wikipedia page. However the subject is the president of Northlands College, which appears to satisfy C6 of WP:NPROF. Qflib (talk) 03:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've made a number of edits towards WP:NOTRESUME; hope this is helpful. Qflib (talk) 03:37, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qflib Is Northlands College a “major academic institution”? I can't even find it among any of the major university rankings (but, it's possible I'm just bad at searching). Melmann 07:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Historically we look for schools to offer masters degrees or higher as one indication of whether it qualifies (this excludes community colleges). This school qualifies under that criterion. Qflib (talk) 20:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think Northlands is major enough to qualify for #C6, and we should go through GNG instead. All our sources are currently PR fluff, stories about Northlands, or stories about the one event of him becoming head of Northlands. I don't think that's enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yael Pineda

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

A really poorly sourced article on a BLP about a footballer that briefly played in the 2nd tier of Mexico. The best that I could find was Futbol Sapiens, which is not enough to show a WP:GNG pass. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 17:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 22:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:14, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanie Cameron

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

Fails WP:NPOL, WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. None of the political positions occupied by this subject is NPOL-passable. Also fails GNG or BASIC generally. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Women, and Australia. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping to add some more info in a couple hours but won't be able to so I won't contest the deletion. DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 11:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You definitely should be able to make improvements. This nomination doesn’t stop you. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I looked for her and found many people with this name... I put Tasmania in the search box and found very little about her: fails WP:GNG. Also, Deputy-mayors and councillors of themselves are not considered notable according to WP:politician. They need significant press coverage for that— Iadmc ♫^talk 12:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Tanay bus accident

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

Fails Wikipedia:Notability (events). No evidence of lasting effects based on GNews Archives and GBooks search. GNews shows a temporary ban on field trips which lasted merely six months. A brief and cited mention is already at List_of_traffic_collisions_(2000–present)#2017 so a redirect ther can be an alternative to deletion. I've also added the reference mentioned above as a citation in said entry. Lenticel ^(talk) 09:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Philippines. Lenticel ^(talk) 09:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - Per nominator

TheNuggeteer (talk) 09:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this well-developed article as a legitimate SPINOFF that passes EVENT. Just 7 years have passed since this accident in which 50 people died. Societal impact beyond the event was acknowledged by nom. Deleting this article will further increase the disparity between the accidents that are being kept and deleted for developed nations versus developing nations. This nomination raises a major equity concern. gidonb (talk) 10:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Satisfies WP:LASTING, accident led to nationwide reforms on field trips and other off-campus activities throughout all school levels up to college in the Philippines in both private and public institutions – instituted after the ban was lifted.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 14:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or redirect to List of traffic collisions (2000–present); Wikipedia is not a collection of news stories. I'll gladly change my !vote if anyone can find at least two retrospective sources to demonstrate sustained coverage, as opposed to news articles and updates. Whether people died or whether it happened in the Philippines are not reasons to keep an article, as I'm sure the other !voters are well aware. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:38, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article should be kept by EVENT. The rest is just something to keep in mind. A general concern. gidonb (talk) 06:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Nueva Ecija bus accident

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

Fails Wikipedia:Notability (events). No evidence of lasting effects based on GNews Archives and GBooks search. A brief and cited mention is already at List_of_traffic_collisions_(2000–present)#2017 so a redirect ther can be an alternative to deletion. Lenticel ^(talk) 09:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Philippines. Lenticel ^(talk) 09:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and merge nothing notable about this particular crash or any WP:LASTING effect. Its supposed claim to notability seems to be one of the deadliest accident within the year (2017). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hariboneagle927 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hariboneagle927, you might want to specify whether you want to delete or merge, merging assumes that a redirect will be made to preserve the page history. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge it is.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of traffic collisions (2000–present). Wikipedia is not a collection of news stories. If there are any critical details missing at the target, they can be added there. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zero-install

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

Article has been undeleted following soft deletion from the previous AfD. Despite that, I still think that this fails WP:NPRODUCT and WP:NSOFT, as searching for "zero install" (with quotes) on Google returned no reliable independent secondary sources. GTrang (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I have changed the article so it now describes a concept, not the particular bit of software, and therefore think that the WP:GNG is more applicable. Some of the old information (about some product) is kept as a section. I am not attached to this text, so if it helps to keep the article, the whole section "Zero Install" (note the uppercase letters) can go. A decent amount of OK sources can be found if the same search is performed on Google Scholar. The problem is that most of these sources do not provide much coverage. The only coherent source found by me that has WP:SIGCOV is a bachelor's thesis, and thus somewhat weak from the reputability perspective. --Викидим (talk) 04:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep since it is not a product, but a kind of process the essays are not relevant. I think more time is required to allow improvement. I remember this concept from over a decade ago, so it is not a new-fangled idea. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yet another option to consider is to merge the lead into Installation (computer programs)#Necessity (renaming the destination section accordingly). The destination section currently has no sources. --Викидим (talk) 05:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This article has become some kind of Frankenstein combination page that disambiguates between several usages of the term zero-install, even though the article was originally about a specific piece of software. I would rather have this article deleted and then a new article created about zero-install created, if the general concept is even notable in the first place. Notability doesn't stack -- using the term in two different contexts to establish notability is very confusing. HyperAccelerated (talk) 19:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The only sources related to a concept itself are: a B. S. WP:SCHOLARSHIP thesis (it's not even masters!) only cited by a patent and the software; and a WP:RESEARCHGATE paper that does not appear to be in any peer-reviewed journal or have significant citations. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:00, 31 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!} 04:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a term, I don't think it currently meets WP:NEO though it might meet Wiktionary's inclusion criteria... I'm not actually sure, I don't really edit there. Depends on if there's a third use and the two currently cited count as "durably archived" I guess, which seems plausible enough. Delete. (actually, now that I think about it a bit more, it might get deleted on wikt: as a sum of parts) Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Ho King

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

Highly unlikely to pass the WP:10YEARTEST (and WP:SUSTAINED). Content which isn't related to the song isn't substantial enough to merit a stand-alone article. – Hilst [talk] 15:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Music, and Companies. – Hilst [talk] 15:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it not only got popular because of the feud but it has been in business since 1976. So it will continue to be in the news and magazines (especially local ones like Now) as it has been for the last several decades Freedun (yippity yap) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it will get coverage because it is a very popular restaurant in toronto regardless of the feud Freedun (yippity yap) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, took a spin through the hits, and before the feud there’s not enough coverage for an article, just lists, listicles, coverage of nearby crime, and one art collective that named itself after the restaurant, everyday restaurant coverage stuff, not anything that would give the restuarant lasting notability. Ruth Bader Yinzburg (Ruth Bader Yinzburg)

Here are some news articles from a long while before the feud. [19] [20] Freedun (yippity yap) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud. The Midnite Wolf (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud or delete. There is no SIGCOV outside the feud and a shooting that occurred in proximity of the restaurant, therefore not enough to pass GNG independently. --hroest 17:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Dickov

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

Poorly sourced women's footballer. The two independent sources in the article are a trivial mention and an interview with minimal routine coverage. I can't find any WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 07:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Scotland. JTtheOG (talk) 07:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 17:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:14, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Star Hill Ponies

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Comics and animation, United Kingdom, and Wales. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I found a newspaper article called "Trotting towards stardom" in the South Wales Evening Post, April 1999, and one called "Titanic tricks for TV puppets" in the Western Daily Press, April 1999. Toughpigs (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, given what was presented here and on the page (thanks Toughpigs) or at the very least Redirect to Bumper Films, if the said sources are really found insufficient. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:09, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 07:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WTAM-LD

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

Fails WP:GNG; some references are outdated. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 07:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Florida. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 07:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.: A history (which, despite what the article implies, actually goes back to the early 1990s, albeit with the license history being severed via a digital companion channel) of mostly national services isn't the path to significant coverage, even before HC2/Innovate took over. There may well be something out there (as best I can tell this is actually this article's first deletion nomination — it wasn't part of that bulk nomination of many other HC2/Innovate station articles), but as currently written this is another remnant of the far looser inclusion standards of 2006. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a second St. Pete Times article on WTAM ([21] + [22]). The station history appears to run like this. Owners in the 90s included Carol E. Schatz and Equity Broadcasting Corporation's Kaleidoscope channel (it was W06BE on channel 6 before becoming WTAM). It was sold to US Interactive LLC, which wanted to (and probably did) use the station in wireless internet testing. It gets sold to Lotus (both of these are similar to KPHE-LD Phoenix) and goes Spanish, though attempt number one fails. I just wish we had more to go on. A third solid reference in local media would have me keeping this, but a redirect might suffice. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 08:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very Important Party

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Events, Computing, and France. toweli (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Demoscene#List of demoparties. — Maile (talk) 13:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Off Road with Gul Panag

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Satja Nai Chum Joan (Suea Sung Fah III)

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Thailand. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Looking up สัจจะในชุมโจร turns up lots of coverage (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL), though as is usual for entertainment news, a lot of it is based on supplied PR material. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First part has a page, 2nd part too, so, coverage allowing verification, I'm in favour of Keeping this as a short (detailed) article. If the identified coverage is judged insufficiently independent, Redirect to Suea Sung Fah. Opposed to deletion.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sokpoly Voeun[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Semi-advertorialized article about a filmmaker and photographer, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for filmmakers or photographers. The strongest attempted notability claim here is a table of "nominations" for awards at various film festivals, except there aren't actually real awards in the mix here: three of the listed festivals are just "screened" or "selected", with no evidence of any actual award nominations or wins shown at all, and most of them are "to be announced" because the festival is still in the future and hasn't even released its program announcements yet, so it still isn't even confirmed that the film will even screen there at all, let alone win any awards.
All of them, further, are "sourced" to the self-published websites of the film festivals themselves, rather than media coverage, and the rest of the footnotes are also a mix of primary and unreliable sources that aren't support for notability, rather than WP:GNG-building coverage in media or books.
There's also a possible conflict of interest here, as the creator and primary other editor have been blocked as sockpuppets in an WP:SPI check following their behaviour in the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reign in Slumber discussion. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Photography, and Cambodia. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 1 June 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!} 06:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Still no reliable sources found in my searches, same as in 2022 when this last came up in AfD. Sourcing now used for the article is all red/orange per Cite Highlighter, so none are reliable. Daily Motion, ImdB and others. Oaktree b (talk) 00:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: ZERO hits on Cambodian websites using a .kh search [23]. There just isn't coverage about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 00:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete it with fire: Zero evidence of notability added since the last AfD. None of the sources provide suitable evidence of notability. No BEFORE results that would pass either. Most of the film festival references fail verification entirely. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I suppose it would be notable if reliable sources verified that he is 531 feet tall as it says in the infobox :) Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:37, 9 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.

Sack of Wiślica

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

a follow-up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135) (nominated by User:TimothyBlue; closed as no consensus on 6 April 2024); and
a formalised continuation of the informal discussion at Talk:Sack of Wiślica#Historiography (2–5 June 2024, with an extensive examination of the sources used, and its complete absence in Kievan Rus' / Ruthenian chronicles where one would expect the 1135 raid and the alleged 1136 counter-raid to be mentioned); and
a parallel to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polish raid on Kievan Rus' (1136) (currently has little participation, but seems to be heading for a weak delete),

I hereby formally propose to either draftify Sack of Wiślica (if any editor is willing to adopt it), or to redirect it to Wiślica#History. (Note: Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135) was renamed to Sack of Wiślica on 3 June 2024‎ by agreement between NLeeuw and Piotrus on the talk page, so this could be regarded as a 2nd nomination of Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135)).

Rationale: WP:NOPAGE; fails WP:SIGCOV for WP:GNG for a stand-alone page, and the sources used so far create WP:POV issues as well. It is one of several dubious articles written by now-blocked User:SebbeKg (previously we agreed to delete SebbeKg's article Bolesław II the Bold's expedition to Kiev (1076–1077) on 27 May). Editors seem to agree that the event took place, but nothing for certain can be said about in detail, as all the sources cited are either WP:PRIMARY (Kadłubek, and in the case of Długosz someone who wrote centuries later and added details that are not historically credible), or WP:USERGENERATED & WP:POV (in the case of KWORUM), or WP:SELFPUB (in the case of Dawne Kieleckie). Everyone agrees that the only substantial WP:RS is Benyskiewicz (2020), and that this source alone is not enough.

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

So, if nobody is willing to adopt the draft, Marcelus and I are proposing to redirect Sack of Wiślica to Wiślica#History until an editor (Piotrus or someone else) finds enough material, based on WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS, written with an WP:NPOV, for a stand-alone page, and has written that page. I already created such a redirect WP:BOLDly, which was BOLDly reverted by Piotrus, and that is fine per WP:BRD. But if there is consensus in this AfD to create a redirect, this may not be reverted BOLDly again until the conditions above for a stand-alone page are met.

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

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Poland, and Ukraine. NLeeuw (talk) 06:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Poland. Owen× ☎ 12:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As I said on article's talk page, we have one in-depth academic source already, and indications that more sources exist (but are hard to access due to being Polish and not digitized well): "BEFORE search in GBooks in Polish strongly suggests other sources exist. Ex. this book by Gerard Labuda mentions keywords "Wiślicy" "1135" (together) on five distinct pages (but sadly I can only get snippet view for two or three). That book is a bit old (1962), but here for example is a more modern one, from 2006, that mentions those keywords together on 15 (!) pages (seems reliable, published by an academic organization, and the writer is a historian associated with Jan Kochanowski University, no pl wiki article yet). I could look for more sources, but I don't have time & will and I think this shows that we can reasonably assume sources on the sack of Wiślica in 1135 exist and the topic is notable." The article needs to be expanded from those academic seconday sources (it is trye much of what we have is PRIMARY), but WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP. The topic seems notable.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bago University Students' Union

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

I have performed WP:BEFORE and searched for in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources. However, I found only these:

These sources are just passing mentions. The subject fails to meet WP:GNG. The majority of sources that are cited are about the protest and arrest, where other people and this union's members were arrested. Does this establish notability? Please ping me if you find any in-depth coverage of the subject. GrabUp - Talk 10:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and Myanmar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bombing of Toncontín International Airport

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

Unneccessary WP:FORK of Football War, already covered there in a few sentences. Page unlikely to be expanded nor new RS published Mztourist (talk) 05:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

u can delete if u want Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

or i i can change text Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i can change the text Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, El Salvador, and Honduras. jlwoodwa (talk) 07:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and Merge. I agree on having the article deleted, besides the fact that I'm also having it's information merged on the Football War article. (talk) 10:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris King and Vicki Grant

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

This article doesn't have reception or signification coverage about the character, and the hero forms section was written awfully or its fully redundant; thus failing WP:GNG. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because they were separated from the Dial H for Hero page by @Jhenderson777: to keep the page from getting too long like the Black Canary page or merge Chris King and his superhero forms to List of Marvel Comics characters: K and Vicki Grant and her superheroine forms to List of Marvel Comics characters: G in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE if the latter happens. --Rtkat3 (talk) 18:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dial H for Hero#1980s series - There is nothing here except for excessively detailed, primary sourced, in-universe plot summary. And the entirety of the plot information here is already present, in more succinct form, at the main Dial H article. Pretty much the only information here that is not already included there is that ridiculously long list of "Hero Forms" and "Villains" that is completely WP:INDISCRIMINATE information that should not be included. There is no reason for this to have ever been split out to a separate article as the same information is already covered at the parent article, making this a redundant fork that should simply be redirect back to the appropriate section of the Dial H article. Rorshacma (talk) 01:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Supplemental Result

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

Procedural nomination as the post-WP:BLAR redirect was rejected at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Supplemental Result. One suggestion was to add content about the subject at the Google (I assume Google Search) article. Jay 💬 05:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, Internet, Software, and Websites. Jay 💬 05:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure but page looks to me to've been AI-written. Hyperbolick (talk) 05:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt. The article was created in 2007 and BLARd in 2017. Jay 💬 06:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Prob not then. Hyperbolick (talk) 19:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Bekemeier

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

Doesn't meet WP:NACTOR and WP:BIO. I can't find any WP:RS. Claggy (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to editing wikipedia. He is an actor/stuntman in SAG-AFTRA who has a world record and a couple of online fandoms. I am not sure what wp:rs, wp:nactor, wp:bio? If you can help me understand and fix this page rather than deleting it, I would greatly appreciate it.

I see what those things are now and he HAS had notable roles. He was the boogeyman in The Boogeyman and the main entity in the film Imaginary, among other films. Please look at his IMDB for background if you insist he has not been in enough. And his world record is clearly linked on this page. Or is that also not enough? He is well known for his contributions to the Atlanta stunt and contortion community. As far as reliable sources... is the Guinness site and IMDB not enough? Of course there are no peer-reviewed articles as he is a stuntman... I am happy to try to add more sources, but those are fairly reputable for this line of work.

I motion to move this to the improvements page instead of deletion. I am open to any suggestions for improvement.

Cheers,

cashworth6

@cashworth6: "WP" stands for Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia requires that its subjects be notable to prevent people from adding information that isn't verifiable and is in many cases incorrect.

There are several policies that determine whether a subject is notable. You should start by reading WP: N (general notability guidelines), then reading WP: NACTOR (specific guidelines for establishing notability for actors), WP: BIO (guidelines for notability about people), and WP: RS (guidelines for what is and isn't a reliable source). These are guidelines that users use to argue whether an article should be kept or deleted. You should also read WP: AFD to get an overview of how the deletion process works.

IMDB contains user generated content under WP: IMDB, so it isn't reliable. Anyone can add anything, including incorrect information, to IMDB. The Guinness source mentions him as a record holder and names his occupation. This doesn't meet the standard for in-depth coverage. If you can find reliable sources that cover the subject in-depth (e.g. a passage about him in the New York Times, a section in a book about stuntmen that discusses his work), then this would improve the article to where it should not be deleted. You're free to ask any questions here or on my talk page if you wish, but please read these policies in their entirety before doing so. HyperAccelerated (talk) 13:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(for the avoidance of doubt, this is a description of the nomination and not a vote) HyperAccelerated (talk) 13:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help and I apologize for my confusion. Cashworth6 (talk) 15:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete little to no sourcing in anything found; what's used now isn't enough and I can't find any listings of this person. To the comments above, the Imdb isn't a reliable source, Guinness records aren't useful and being in the union isn't notable. We'd require articles written about this person, somewhere, in order to be notable here. Oaktree b (talk) 19:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, my apologies. -cashworth6

DUnit

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

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Astorga Junquera

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

Subject has a stable article at Spanish Wikipedia but notability according to English Wikipedia guidelines for either WP:GNG, WP:NACADEMIC or WP:ARTIST isn't evident. I'd like to hear what others think. Rkieferbaum (talk) 01:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Artists, and Venezuela. Rkieferbaum (talk) 01:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notable Any biography: The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field- His recognized contribution to Digital Art Curation. HarveyPrototype (talk) 20:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recognized by whom? The term "digital art curation" does not even appear in the article. Geschichte (talk) 04:15, 31 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!} 01:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I am not finding reliable sources to show notability. There are huge swaths of unreferenced material in the article about his career. IMDB and Facebook citations are unreliable. Fails WP:GNG. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am also having difficulty finding significant coverage in reliable sources. This is mostly due to translation issues and there seems to be some mixing of info on this subject and their father, mixing information on Juan Astorga Junquera, and Juan Astorga, Juan Astorga Anta, etc. This subject's father, Juan Astorga Anta was the first director of the Museum of Modern Art in Merida and it is named after him ("Museo de Arte Moderno Juan Astorga Anta").[24]) There might some salvageable article here, but leaning towards delete at this time Elspea756 (talk) 14:47, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As with WomenArtistUpdates and Elspea756 above, I do not see in-depth reliable sources on which we could base notability and an article. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Agcaoili

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

Almost entirely the work of User:Greyhat, who, based on the deleted edit summaries for File:Phil Agcaoili 2011.jpg, has been in personal contact with the subject. Unclear the subject is notable, and the article is highly promotional. The company he founded is apparently not notable enough to have an article. -- Beland (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Internet, Georgia (U.S. state), New York, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SagamoreHill Broadcasting

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

Subject does not meet the WP:NCORP because of a lack of in-depth coverage. PROD was contested so bringing it to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and Georgia (U.S. state). Let'srun (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: While I am unable to find indepth articles specifically about SagamoreHill Broadcasting, I did see plenty of articles that mention the company and articles about the stations it owns. Hkkingg (talk) 07:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Fox (author)

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

Appears to be overly promotional and shows no sign of meeting WP:GNG due to lack of RS. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 03:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Entertainment, Finance, Law, Internet, California, Michigan, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vortex - We got a notice that this page was flagged for deletion. Great timing as I have been meaning to hopefully update it. The info is old and not entirely accurate as it was written by fans of my books years ago. Can u share any guidance on how we can improve its "notability" to meet Wikipedia standards? Also what is "RS"? You're probably a volunteer so thanks for all the work you do for the Wikipedia community. Scott Nelsonave21 (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Scott. Please read this link WP:GNG for the general standards to meet "notability". On Wikipedia, RS stands for "reliable sources". For authors, this commonly includes reviews of your books. None of the sources cited on the article are WP:RS because they are just raw interviews of you, only mention you briefly (see WP:GNG for more info) or are written by Forbes contributors (see this link WP:FORBES for info on deciding what Forbes articles count as RS).

Also, yes, like many editors on Wikipedia, I am a volunteer and edit as a hobby :) — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mention: @Nelsonave21 — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, I'm concerned about you saying "We got a notice that this page was flagged for deletion." Just a head's up — if you got an email about this, please be aware that scammers have targeted people whose articles have been deleted or flagged for deletion before (WP:SCAM), offering to restore it or something similar. Most, if not all, of these offers are fradulent. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 09:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vortex: thank you for this detailed reply. This is super helpful. We will work on it. What is the best way to submit or update? Is there a timeline? Thanks again, including for the accurate warning about the (likely scammy) deletion email we received. Nelsonave21 (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nelsonave21: Please see WP:AFD, particularly this line: If you wish for an article to be kept, you can directly improve the article to address the reasons for deletion given in the nomination. You can search [for] reliable sources so that the article meets notability guidelines. AfD discussion like this one are kept open for at least seven days before a decision is made (multiple editors have to give their opinions first before a decision about the consensus can be made, so this discussion will probably go on for longer).

In your case, editing the article yourself would be COI editing, which is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. However, you can find examples of reliable sources about you or your books and post it here, on this AfD, to prove the article meets WP:GNG. This would prevent deletion. Again, most RS for authors takes the form of book reviews in newspapers, magazines, or periodicals.

If this AfD is closed with consensus to delete the article, the article can be recreated if and only if it satisfies WP:GNG. In this case, I recommend the AfC process, which involves writing a draft article and submitting it for review. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've not reviewed the article yet, but while it is normal for an AFD discussion to be closed within a week or a month, don't worry too much about that, you can usually get an admin to restore the contents as a draft or by email if you'd like to work on it. "Deletion" is not generally irreversible. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The USA Today won't open, the rest are non-RS per Cite Highlighter. Unfortunately, I don't see book reviews, nor much of anything for this person. No notability found, does not pass AUTHOR. Oaktree b (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Oaktree, Alpha3031, Vortex3427 and other editors - thanks very much for the followup on this.

We have gathered 100+ links referring to my work supporting startup entrepreneurs over the years, including dozens of book reviews, speaking appearances, and podcasts. We will narrow those down to the more significant ones.

What's the best way to share those links? I know you are volunteers and don't want to burden you, so how can we help best? (Happy to draft a rewrite of the current page for your review but not sure that's allowed.)

Also, many of the bigger name book reviews were from my first book back in 2006-8. It was a pioneering work in the development of Web 2.0 entrepreneurship. We have jpgs and some PDFs of those articles from outlets like the Boston Globe, Philadelphia Inquirer, Toronto Globe & Mail, Orange County Register etc. but unfortunately the old URLs are mostly 404 by now. How best to share those?

Similarly - my books have been translated into many languages around the world. That seems to show they are "notable" also in other languages. We found links to some of those (Turkish, Polish, Vietnamese) but other editions (like Russian and Japanese) are not discoverable via English search engines. We do have screen shots of the cover art, though. Can we share those, too?

Thanks for your help learning how Wikipedia works. I have donated repeatedly in the past but never gotten into the nuts & bolts of it like this.

Scott

p.s. I'm currently working on 2 new books to help startup founders, esp under-represented female, minority, and non-US entrepreneurs. Thank you all for your time. Hopefully we can keep my page alive so its available during those book launches next year. Nelsonave21 (talk) 20:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Sullo

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SNG. Purely written for promotion. Article's author also wrote Nikto (vulnerability scanner) - subject closely related to the article in nomination. (Note: The author (User:Root exploit) also self-describes themselves as "Security Researcher" on their userpage). --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Internet, United States of America, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:55, 1 June 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!} 03:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I can find no WP:SIGCOV of Sullo, only passing mentions of his role in creating Nikto. There's significant coverage here, but it's a blog and appears to be WP:SELFPUBLISHED. I also reviewed the discussion in the no-consensus 2006 and 2007 AfDs, and the "keep" votes were highly unpersuasive, rehearsing the WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS already in the article and making non-policy-based arguments for notability (such as a one-word "notable" and citing a "desperate wish" to keep the article). I would encourage other editors to review the sources and prior discussions carefully. If after 18 years(!) sufficient WP:SIGCOV in secondary, independent, reliable sources cannot be found, this article should not be kept. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay of Evelix

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

Completely unsourced except a dead link; cannot find any references to the family as a whole rather than individual members. Rusalkii (talk) 04:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or Redirect: inadequate BEFORE - the usual sources for baronetcies (cf the many hundreds of other articles on baronetcies) are available if anyone takes the trouble to look. However, it's true that the article is in poor shape and inaccurate in part, by comparison with Cokayne (the standard and authoritative reference on baronetcies). The article can be corrected from that, but frankly, little would be lost if it were redirected to Lindsay baronets#Lindsay baronets, of Evelick (1666) (per WP:ATD - "Lindsay of Evelix" is a plausible search term), where the additional references would be more useful. Ingratis (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- see below Ingratis (talk) 05:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are "the usual sources"? I'm not very familiar with this area, I'm just reviewing old unsourced articles. Rusalkii (talk) 23:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or Merge with Lindsay baronets. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 13:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{clarifying above !vote) - I think Redirect is the way to go. The "usual sources" - i.e. baronetages - give the details of the title's descent, which is what they're for, but the nominator is correct that there seems to be very little additional information about the family as such, and the title can be adequately dealt with at the article Lindsay baronets, where I've added the reference from Cokayne's Complete Baronetage. I don't see that there's really anything to merge, as further details relate to individuals who already have their own articles. Ingratis (talk) 06:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poitín (band)

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

Does not meet WP:BAND criteria. The founder and main contributor of the site is apparently someone from the band and the page is more a self-presentation. FromCzech (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughts. Do you have any suggestions to avoid it being deleted? Poitin31 (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious as well how to avoid deletion (I'm not a member of this band in case of any accusation of self-presentation). Kmarty (talk) 11:19, 29 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!} 04:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the band does not meet WP:BAND criteria, there is no way to prevent deletion. FromCzech (talk) 05:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need to hear more opinions from editors about this article and what should happen with it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I cannot see multiple reliable sources having covered this band in sufficient detail to meet notability requirements. C 679 13:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CsUnit

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG. Has one ref from a predatory journal. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I don't know enough about the sources to assess the quality of the journal sources and whether the nominator would say they are predatory, but there appears to be sufficient scholarly coverage of this subject. However, my lack of knowledge prevents me from !voting. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find anything significant. The one ref I was talking about is this, which is inactive (it's also a low-quality journal so fails RS). --WikiLinuz (talk) 02:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cuppa (Java library)[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article was quite obviously created by the developer. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:57, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Calvo (baseball)

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

This does not meet the criteria for notability. A Google search yields no results outside of Baseball-Reference. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Baseball, and Mexico. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Found some brief mentions on newspapers.com such as [[25]] and [[26]], but not enough there to meet the GNG. I'd guess there is probably enough coverage in Mexico to meet the notability guidelines, though. Let'srun (talk) 11:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bernardo Calvo

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

This article does not meet the notability criteria. There are simply no references to him on the internet other than compendiums of baseball stats which include his name. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Baseball, and Mexico. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Found some routine coverage on newspapers.com such as [[27]] and [[28]], but nothing that is GNG worthy. However, it is quite possible that there are Mexican sources that could help this subject meet the notability guidelines. Let'srun (talk) 11:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AdaControl

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

Fails WP: N. PROD removed by article creator who added a user testimony. Since this testimony is self-published, it cannot be used to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The testimony is from Jacob Sparre Andersen, editor of the Ada User Journal and a subject-matter expert. I also found ~~[29]~~ and [30]. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:40, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've struck [1] as the bulk of this information is copied from AdaControl's website, as is was the article lede. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I get an access denied error when viewing [2]. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Login to the WP:TWL. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HyperAccelerated Sorry, I didn't realize that it was an expiring link. While archive.org deems this upload to be spam, go to [31] and click on the first result. Aaron Liu (talk) 03:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that source isn't independent though. It's published by a committee called QualOSS. One of the members of QualOSS, as listed on the first page of their report, is AdaCore. AdaCore has provided services for the benefit of Adalog -- see this document that suggests a substantial rewrite of one of Adalog's systems. HyperAccelerated (talk) 17:37, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That reads like a design document about how they simplified a language feature or component of their software called "Adalog". It treats "Adalog" as a software component or feature instead of an entity. It shows example features of transformations they want libadalang, an analysis tool for Ada, to do. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Searching further in their GitHub repos, according to https://github.com/AdaCore/langkit/blob/master/langkit/support/langkit_support-adalog-solver.adb, "Adalog" here is a pseudocode language made by AdaCore. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Separately, the testimony is self-published. Even if he is a subject matter expert, why should we consider this reliable? None of the presentation contents have been reviewed by others. I don't have reason to doubt Andersen's credentials, but one self-published source alone cannot establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 17:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if he is a subject matter expert, why should we consider this reliable?
WP:SELFPUB: Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not self-published, it was presented at the "Reliable Software Technologies – Ada-Europe 2017", proceedings published by Springer, see https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-60588-3 Jprosen75 (talk) 16:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this to be JP Rosen, whose connection to AdaControl is explained in this bio. They've created ~46% of the page. I've left them a COI warning. I'm tagging the article, which also contains promotional language like "gives the same level of accuracy as the language", soon. Still, I don't think that means we must delete, as these are all fixable issues. Aaron Liu (talk) 03:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD has been out for nearly a week now and most of the sources found don't really establish notability. Are we sure this article should still be kept? HyperAccelerated (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see my response above. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"gives the same level of accuracy as the language" is really about ASIS, and explains why ASIS was chosen for the tool.

Yes, I am the author of the software, and I'm willing to improve as required. Jprosen75 (talk) 15:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did your authorship have to be pointed out by another user? You need to read WP: COI. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:18, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chill it, I already sent a message about COI. Not every new user can automatically know to read all policies. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:47, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it is true, then it needs a source that states that claim in full. IMO using the same "backend" doesn't necessarily mean they have the same level of "accuracy". Aaron Liu (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I am not a frequent contributor, and I did not know about the COI policy. Feel free to add the COI template (I am not sure to do it correctly myself). Actually, I added this article when I saw that AdaControl was missing from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tools_for_static_code_analysis, while the competitors software were there, which I found unfair. Jprosen75 (talk) 08:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WBON-LD

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Kentucky. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:54, 25 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!} 01:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on additions made since nomination?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tan Yinglan

AfDs for this article:

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

Factors do not appear to have meaningfully changed since the prior discussion. He's an active businessperson, and Insignia Ventures Partners may be notable but he does not appear so as an author. Star Mississippi 01:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, and Singapore. Star Mississippi 01:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-19/singapore-s-insignia-ventures-intensifies-push-into-healthtech, https://www.ft.com/content/8c484648-f4b7-11e9-a79c-bc9acae3b654, https://www.reuters.com/technology/insignia-ventures-raises-516-mln-bets-southeast-asian-tech-firms-2022-08-01/, https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/13/insignia-venture-partners-fund-25-million-yinglan-tan/. There is also coverage in New Straits Times [32][33]. 182.190.216.63 (talk) 14:00, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of ESPNU personalities

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

This group does not have the requisite coverage in secondary sources as a group to meet the criteria established by WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 02:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Television, Sports, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 02:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to ESPNU as an WP:ATD. It serves as a WP:NAVIGATION, but there are no grouping sources for satisfying WP:LISTN. Conyo14 (talk) 18:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge to ESPNews per WP:ATD. A list that is useful being a category but not as a list, which is entirely unsourced. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unsourced and fails verification; a spot-check of articles linked (Joe Davis (sportscaster), Mike Crispino, Andy Katz) shows none of them mention ESPNU, just ESPN in general. The concept of being an "ESPNU personality" (separate from other ESPN brands) does not appear to exist. Walsh90210 (talk) 22:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I believe there was a consensus for a merge as a viable ATD, but nom's request for a relist is reasonable, so I have done so.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raquel Anderson

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a New Zealand women's rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG. A possible redirect target is New Zealand women's national rugby league team. JTtheOG (talk) 02:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Rugby league, and New Zealand. JTtheOG (talk) 02:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as I can't find any sigcov. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 07:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Week keep Some sources to indicate notability, but only just. Mn1548 (talk) 16:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Piñon, Montrose County

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

Having reviewed the sources I generally rely on to determine if a Colorado place is real or formerly existed. In this case, there appears to be a location named "Piñon" in Montrose County, but it's not notable nor actually a town. No SIGCOV in RSs. Pbritti (talk) 02:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Pbritti (talk) 02:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - In a WP:BEFORE search I discovered that Pinon, Colorado was the second largest town in Montrose County, Colorado in the early 20th century, during its mining boom before it went bust. If you google it without the tilde over the first 'n' you will find a lot of hits that are significant coverage WP:SIGCOV in newspapers and books. It definitely meets WP:GNG. I've added four citations in reliable sources and expanded the article. This article on a western mining boomtown should be kept. Netherzone (talk) 04:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Netherzone: These sources seem to indicate that all material in this article should be merged to Nucla, Colorado, as the Pinon described in these sources became Nucla. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Pinon was it's own distinct town, there really is nothing between it an Nucla, which became much larger than Pinon over the years - they should be two separate articles. Netherzone (talk) 18:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep an easy WP:BEFORE search shows it qualifies for a distinct article. The book Colorado Day by Day (p. 81) suggests Piñon was the original townsite, but then settlers moved 10 miles west to found Nucla. Also covered extensively by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. SportingFlyer T·C 16:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @SportingFlyer and Netherzone: If I withdrew the AfD and moved the article to Pinon Colony, Colorado (swapping the ñ for an n but including it as a bolded alternate spelling in the lead), would that be agreeable? I think that most of the content shows this is a continuous community with Nucla (as opposed to similar colonies like South Denver), but you two disagreeing inclines me towards retaining separate articles. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  No, I don't agree with that. The content clearly shows that Pinon was a community 10 miles east of Nucla, and then was moved to Nucla after a canal was built. They are not the same place, and ghost towns are eligible for articles under NPLACE (and this passes GNG on its own as well.) Pinon Colony is not the WP:COMMONNAME and would make it more difficult for people to add sources to the article. SportingFlyer T·C 17:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- @Pbritti, I think it should remain as Pinon (not Pinon Colony) because all of the reliable newspaper and book references (many more than I added to the article) say Pinon or Piñon, and it is the official name for the town in these records and how it was known by locals in the past. @SportingFlyer is correct that Pinon is the common name. Pinon was a distinct town which is now a ghost town - a mining boomtown.
  
  BTW, I've spent time in this area on an extended photographic road trip, and went through Nucla, Natarita, Paradox, Uravan, Bedrock Slickrock, and drove through many of these tiny mining towns thruout Paradox Valley and Montrose County. Some still have derelict buildings, other were completely raised when the uranium mining boom occurred (the are is filled with vanadium). The Paradox Valley area has a fascinating history.
  The only change I would suggest is either to put "Montrose County" in parenthesis or "Montrose County, Colorado" in parentheses), but I'm not sure if that is standard formatting. If there is not another Pinon, Colorado then I think that should be the article name since that is how the other small towns or former towns mentioned above are formatted. Thank you for offering to withdrawing the AfD. Netherzone (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Using the sources provided, I don't think we can definitively say a. Piñon was a distinct community from Nucla (differing only in about five miles of location and sharing both the same people, government, and buildings), b. that it is a ghost town, and c. that it clears GNG. The following is a review of sources in the article:
  1. RoadsideThoughts: Not strictly an RS and certainly fails to provide SIGCOV. However, it does give us a geolocation, so best to keep it for now.
  
  2. San Miguel Basin Forum, Jan 12, 2005: This is a local newspaper publishing someone's summary of what appears to be an older self-published book and a masters dissertation. It suggests Piñon was the second-largest town in Montrose County but then describes the same community, under the auspices of the Colorado Cooperative Company, establishing themselves as Nucla.
  
  3. The Co-operator: This is a 119-year-old primary source, so caution advised. However, page 8 suggests that the Piñon site was just a temporary location for the CCC community that established Nucla–further suggesting continuity between the communities.
  
  4. San Miguel Basin Forum, October 1, 1975: Describes Pinon as a landing place for the CCC before everyone and everything moved to the Nucla site.
  
  5. San Miguel Forum, July 7, 1994: Deferring mostly to the name "Pinon Colony", the article describes the people of the CCC community moving from the Pinon site to Nucla and taking their buildings with them.
  
  6. The Denver Public Library source explicitly describes Piñon as the same community as Nucla.
  
  7. Montrose Press, July 2, 2009: This is about a geological formation known as the Piñon Ridge and has nothing to do with the community. Should be removed.
  
  An additional source can be found here from the Montrose Press (using the incorrect spelling of "Pinion"). It establishes that the CCC camp was first named "Cottonwood Camp", then Pinon, then (when everything but the cemetery moved) Nucla. These are all the same community, moved repeatedly as artificial waterways were constructed. It is akin to how Dillon moved when the Dillon Reservoir was constructed: the same community, but a different spot. Notably, Piñon does not appear in comprehensive guides to Colorado ghost towns, like Guide to Colorado Ghost Towns and Mining Camps or Ghost Towns of the Colorado Rockies. As to name, Piñon, Colorado (with no mention of the county, as no other "Piñon" exists in Colorado) would be the correct name per the conventions. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Those aren't all of the sources, though. As I've noted, Colorado Day by Day spends time on them as two separate communities. Nucla has an incorporation date in 1915 according to that book, so it's very clear they're distinct communities by that date alone, even though there is a mention of someone from Nucla in a 1909 government report. SportingFlyer T·C 05:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Considering the majority of sources specifically about the subject disagree with that book which isn't specifically about the subject, I would emphasize the Denver Public Library article as our best source. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  @Pbritti, I respect what you do here but I disagree with you that Pinon was a non-notable settlement. I stand behind my !vote to retain the article. I've continued to improve the article and added additional newspaper and book sources, and three historical photographs. I've also added content about the correlation between Nucla and Pinon from The Daily Sentinel [34]. You may find that the article now meets the Heyman Standard. Please consider having another look at it in its current state. The former settlement has a history that has encyclopedic value, even though it no longer exists and the population shifted to Nucla. Clearly it was a notable settlement, per the above and that it was the second most populous town in Montrose County. I feel strongly that its removal would not be an improvement to the encyclopedia. Netherzone (talk) 00:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per @Netherzone

TheNuggeteer (talk) 10:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Koch Marx

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found were routine transactional announcements (1, 2, 3). JTtheOG (talk) 02:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 02:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Main coverage appears to be from his time in Jersey, but I don't think there's enough for a WP:GNG pass. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luvuyo Pupuma

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

Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 02:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 02:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:09, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kirakira (video game)

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

Nothing in the article suggests this game is notable; single footnote is to some Internet radio show whose relation to the game is not even clear from the article. Metacritic has no reviews. Maybe sources exist in Japanese, but nothing useful seems to be found on ja wiki. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom. TheBritinator (talk) 13:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The game did get significant coverage in Siliconera, suggesting there is potentially more out there despite the vague name not doing it many favors. It also got a review from UK Anime Network, but the jury is out on whether they are reliable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Reviews in Siliconera and RPG Fan, both reliable per WP:VG/S. 2 reviews in UK Anime Network: [35], [36]. Per WP:A&M/RS reviews by Andy Hanley are reliable. --Mika1h (talk) 13:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Mika1h, the game has enough sources to pass WP:GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:38, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by Hum TV

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NLIST and is WP:NOTTVGUIDE. It has not "been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources" as references verify the shows but do not talk about the group as a whole. There are nine current programs that are sourced which can easily be placed in the Hum TV page if necessary. History of the page also shows this has been the target of socks and COI since 2017 from Hum TV. While not a reason to delete, the list only stands to promote the station. CNMall41 (talk) 18:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, Asia, Pakistan, Middle East, Europe, and United States of America. CNMall41 (talk) 18:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: detailed article about a notable network: see WP:SPLITLIST. If a merge into the main article was an improvement, I would not be opposed but it would be an issue. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a detailed article unfortunately. It is a list. If it is a problem to merge per SPLITLIST, then a redirect would work. However, it would need to be notable per NLIST to have a standalone page. I looked and could not find reliable sources that talk about the list as a grouping but I have been proven wrong before if someone can provide those sources. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would tend to believe that, whenever the list format is appropriate, a list can be a detailed page on any given subject mentioned briefly in a section of another article. The subject is obviously a subtopic of Hum TV, it would be difficult to argue otherwise. See Template Main list (which uses the word Main where "Detailed" is to be understood). See also the template For Timeline, similar. If you want to redirect and merge, sure, if all agree and size is not an issue; but this type of page is pretty standard, though, by the way. Look at the categories and the pages they contain....

For sources, you have for example, https://internationalrasd.org/journals/index.php/pjhss/article/download/1259/936/9962 ; or see Forging the Ideal Educated Girl: The Production of Desirable Subjects in Muslim South Asia (2018). But I consider WP:SPLITLIST to be the applicable section of the guideline and the fact that it's a pretty standard approach to programs of notable networks should imv encourage us to keep that list. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"I would tend to believe that, whenever the list format is appropriate, a list can be a detailed page on any given subject mentioned briefly in a section of another article" - I like that thinking and generally it seems acceptable on its face. The problem is that the list must meet notability guidelines. If not, then it should stay mentioned briefly on the notable network page. Here there are only nine programs and they do not all appear to be original programs, just current programming. I do like "a pretty standard approach to programs of notable networks" as you mentioned above. They can easily be covered by the category as opposed to standalone list (for those that are "original programmin" - the rest are just TV Guide listings) in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also concerned about the fate of borderline/mildly notable series/programs whose pages are redirected to pages like this (not about the pages themselves, but at the idea that the ATD is not an ATD). And more generally about the issue of notability of various lists like this. Allow me to quote User:Maile66's comment during a recent Afd: "Refer to Category:Lists of television series by network. Generally speaking, most of them list the programs they carry, and have no sourcing. Most of them are also kept current if programs are added or dropped. There are literally hundreds of stations involved, if not thousands of stations and programs involved. If anyone disagrees with how it's handled, I'd suggest discussing it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television." I think it's a fair concern. Either a broader discussion or a consensus that, yes, sourcing should be better but that this type of pages should generally be considered OK when the network is notable. A broader discussion would perhaps be helpful.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to the page are a concern but they should not have bearing on notability. Unfortunately, I think a lot of the programs may not meet notability guidelines but do not want to do a mass deletion. Maybe someone can take up the task and redirect them to the main station page. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: WP:NLIST applies without any special exception and that in general lists of programs, where needed, can be handled within the article about the channel, and don't generally merit a stand-alone list article, unless such a list would pass the scrutiny per WP:NLIST. WP is not a WP:NOTDIRECTORY nor WP:NOTTVGUIDE —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hum TV as WP:ATD. 2A00:23C6:139B:A101:78CA:7B5:3148:9172 (talk) 00:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : I suggest to Keep the Article. As it a large number of notable program's are listed on it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:ad80:ab:6d1:1:0:713f:e3e2 (talk • contribs)

Arguments to avoid: WP:NOTINHERITED. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But 2402:ad80:ab:6d1:1:0:713f:e3e2 has a point; WP:TVGUIDE says: "An article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules, format clocks, etc., although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant program lists and schedules may be acceptable." (emphasis mine). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : The only difference between this list and how other station programmings are done, is that usually the list of programming is a separate section at the bottom of the article for the station itself. In this case, they simply separated the list of programming into its own article. — Maile (talk) 12:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I am wondering is if there are sources that talk about this list as a group? Otherwise, it is a TVGUIDE listing and does not meet WP:NLIST. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your replies. To be honest I don't even understand how TVGUIDE applies here (nor to most of the lists mentioned above in Maile66's quote): "An article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules, format clocks, etc., although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant program lists and schedules may be acceptable." As for sources on Hum Tv programs as a set, see my reply above. And as for WP:NLIST is a guideline, sure, but so is WP:SPLITLIST that imv applies to all these lists of programs of notable networks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:00, 9 June 2024 (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! 01:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Globe, Oregon

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

Contested PROD. Non-notable location, article sourced only to GNIS and to a topographic map. Little else found. Fails WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG in absence of better sourcing. Topo maps do suggest there was once more of a settlement there than at present, but without sourcing to describe it we can't have an article. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Oregon. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete and Strong Merge. I absolutely agree, because it should be in the article about the Lane County, Oregon in the first place. I've already proposed on merging it to the article about Lane County of Oregon anyway. (talk) 16:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zahedan Stadium

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

Merge Fails to meet WP:GNG. Should be included in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zahedan#Sports Wikilover3509 (talk) 15:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have fixed spacing in the header that broke some of the links, but have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Iran. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep AfD is not for merge requests, and I think both of the sources in the article demonstrate notability when translated. I just don't know how to do a WP:BEFORE search for this one, but stadiums of this capacity are generally notable. SportingFlyer T·C 18:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 16:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect to Zahedan#Sports no coverage for its own article. Giant Snowman 16:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Riksundar Banerjee

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

Failing all criteria of WP:NBIO, publishing articles and non notable books not fulfils WP:GNG Pinakpani (talk) 08:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject fails to meet WP:GNG as there is no in-depth coverage from independent, reliable secondary sources. However, the subject's book titled "The Book of India Ghosts" may meet WP:AUTHOR criterion number 3, which requires multiple reviews of books to establish notability. There are two reviews available for that particular book, one from The Hindu and one from The Hindu BusinessLine. Both reviews are from different publications and authors. GrabUp - Talk 18:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:BIO, WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR. The author's work has not made a significant monument, or won significant critical attention. One of his book "The book of India Ghosts", got a review from hindu.com but this cannot be considered the criteria needed to pass WP:AUTHOR because the work needs to be widely cited by peers or successors. RangersRus (talk) 15:01, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus: WP:AUTHOR’s third criterion states: “The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.” There are two reviews from The Hindu and The Hindu BusinessLine from different authors. I think this is sufficient to meet the third criteria, as multiple reviews from independent sources are available. There are other criteria, but if a subject meets any of them, then it can be presumed to be notable. GrabUp - Talk 15:35, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: This talks about the author [37]; on the balance, just enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hampton, Lane County, Oregon

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

Contested PROD. Non-notable railroad waypoint. Sources consist of 1) GNIS (does not count for notability); 2) the DeLorme atlas (likely based on GNIS); 3) a place-names gazetteer (also not sufficient for notability), and 4) the page for the Hampton Boat Launch at the Willamette National Forest USFS page, which is a page about, well, a boat launch, and not any "community" or "locale". The text of the article clearly says this is a "locale", which is not a populated place, and no other sources could be found; thus, this fails WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Oregon. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete From what I can see on the maps and old aerials, it was a water stop which disappeared withe the steam locomotive. We have not taken these rail points as notable. Mangoe (talk) 05:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The result was delete‎. "Could be useful" and "historical tidbit" are not policy based arguments Star Mississippi 02:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sligo Wild Geese[edit]

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

The only source since 2014 is a brief mention and I can find nothing to indicate any notability. A google search (excluding Wikipedia) find only a few hits with just a couple of brief mentions. A newspaper.com search also returns nothing. KylieTastic (talk) 11:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Ireland. KylieTastic (talk) 11:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. A relatively short-lived (local/non-profit/community) organisation that fails WP:CLUB and WP:SIGCOV. (We don't even have sources to establish the basic facts - like when the org were established/established - not to mind anything that establishes notability.) In my own WP:BEFORE, the only news sources I can find include this and this and represent represent the scarcist of trivial passing mentions in (hyper) local news sources (indicating that subject org was not even covered in any great depth in very local news coverage; Not to mind the type of [at least national] coverage that would confirm that the club's activities were "national or international in scale". As would be expected by WP:CLUB.) The only "claim to fame/notability" given in the article, about the org being "notable for many firsts, including their involvement in pioneering north–south co-operation during the beginning of the then fragile Irish peace process" represents flowery editorial and puffery that isn't supported by anything at all...) Guliolopez (talk) 11:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I was trying to de-orphan and clean this up but the sourcing doesn't seem to be there. --Here2rewrite (talk) 01:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This isn't the least sourced or most puffed stub I've seen today, or even the second, but it's close enough in spirit (per above) and the first I saw already nominated. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not a notable group. Spleodrach (talk) 06:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think with some research, the article could serve an interesting historical tidbit. --evrik ^(talk) 20:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the recent additions?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Agree with Evrik. It could be useful. I will look for more references. MaskedSinger (talk) 08:34, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attack on Mette Frederiksen

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS. Should be merged into Mette Frederiksen#Personal life and would fit perfectly there. Absolutely no need for a separate article. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Denmark. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — An attack on a current head of government hardly counts as WP:NOTNEWS. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Events. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen - WP:NOTNEWS, WP:SUSTAINED, take your pick. Yes, an attack on a current head of government can be a notable event, but...
On 7 June 2024, Frederiksen was purportedly shoved by a man in Kultorvet, Copenhagen.
Frederiksen sat down at a café after the attack.
~Adam^{(talk · contribs)} 14:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen. He wasn't really attacked, he was shoved and the sourcing reflects that. Easily covered in a sentance on the main article. Esolo5002 (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen - With all information. Clearly created at an early stage, anyways notable but not for a separate article.BabbaQ (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen per above. Uffda608 (talk) 16:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen. An egging would be more notable than this, and I doubt this would qualify for WP:10YT. Borgenland (talk) 16:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It slipped my tongue for the past 24 hours but finally, I'm also adding WP:LASTING for merge argument. Borgenland (talk) 15:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen. Not an attack really.--Catlemur (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen (where incident is already covered) per above. Økonom (talk) 18:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen. WP:CRIME and WP:BLPCRIME also apply. A separate Wikipedia article about a crime should not be created when the victim already has a pre-existing article, because they are a notable person for other reasons. Material about a suspect shouldn't be included in an article until a conviction is secured. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 00:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This event isn't notable enough to be remembered for any length of time. She was purely injured. The unknown person at the time of writing possibly never had a plan to use any weapons but to just shove. Unlike the other example in the article such as Fico's attempted assassination being an event likely to be remembered because a politician was injured by firearm by someone who opposed the Prime Minister's policies. 71.223.90.84 (talk) 14:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - I agree I was reading the article and thinking that this is too light to be considered attack. What's next, calling an insult an attack on a politician? This is a waste of data. Cganuelas (talk) 19:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. There doesn't seem to be enough relevant information on this to warrant a full article at this time, and from the description of the event, I would suspect very little will be forthcoming. DeemDeem52 (talk) 14:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liaoning Flying Leopards–Sichuan Blue Whales brawl

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

Neutral nom on behalf of an IP who stated: Zhanghang0704 only ever made 6 edits, all over the course of 3 days in late March 2016: the creation of this article, 4 more edits to it, and an edit to Liaoning Flying Leopards. I believe this article is a blatant violation of WP:NOTNEWS, as the brawl (which happened 5 days before this article's creation) does not appear to have sustained coverage - to say nothing of the article itself being extremely barebones despite a whopping 9 references. Star Mississippi 00:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Basketball, and China. Star Mississippi 00:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:NOTNEWS applies here with a complete lack of sustained coverage, to say nothing of the WP:NPOV issues and the fact of the article being created by a SPA. Let'srun (talk) 01:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Violates WP:NOTNEWS and hardly notable. ADifferentMan (talk) 02:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:59, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 2016 CBA Playoffs#Finals (with the history preserved under the redirect) per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. 2016 CBA Playoffs#Finals already mentions this brawl.
A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 11:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Let'srun (talk · contribs) and ADifferentMan (talk · contribs), would you support a redirect to 2016 CBA Playoffs#Finals per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion? Cunard (talk) 11:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no issues with a redirect. Let'srun (talk) 11:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. ADifferentMan (talk) 07:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saturne Party

(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: Music, Visual arts, Events, Computing, and France. toweli (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. This is such a niche subject that this doesn't make sense as a standalone. — Maile (talk) 13:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

XIX International Chopin Piano Competition

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

WP:TOOSOON article about a thing there's absolutely nothing of any significance to say yet. This is still about a year and a half away, so we obviously don't know who the prize winners or even the competitors are -- literally the only thing we can say about it at this point is basic competiton rules sourced to the competition's own self-published website about itself, which is not a notability-building source.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation next year if and when there's actually reliably sourceable stuff to say about it, but we don't already need a boilerplate placeholder article to exist now. Bearcat (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Poland. Bearcat (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:55, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I have now added numerous sources and expanded the article. The competition will begin on 23 April 2025, which is less than a year. The Chopin Competition is the most important musical event in Poland and one of the most significant events in classical music. Creating an article at this point, also considering that the rules have changed considerably for this edition, which is surely of interest to the reader, seems to be justified. As more verified information becomes available closer to the event date, the article can be further expanded. I believe having a well-sourced preliminary article now is preferable to waiting until the last minute. intforce (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The time for an article about an event is not "a year out", it's "when there's substantive things to say about it beyond just 'this is a thing that will happen'". Bearcat (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Meh. This is crystallbalish but useful, and there are already some sources about the upcoming program. Yes, technically we might be justfied with dratifying this for a while, but seriously, this is make-work that is pointless. We know this event will be notable. Why waste time moving it out from mainspace and back?

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to International Chopin Piano Competition. Doesn't need a seperate article, IMO.— Iadmc ♫^talk 12:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment anything could happen to stop the competition from taking place! WP:NOTCRYSTAL. I do note that the other events have their own articles but they are full of information after the fact. Draftify is another option — Iadmc ♫^talk 12:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

anything could happen to stop the competition from taking place is not what WP:NOTCRYSTAL implies. The competition is just as likely to take place as the next Olympics or the next World Cup, all of which are events which fulfil WP:NOTCRYSTAL criteria: the event is notable, almost certain to take place, and preparations are in progress. intforce (talk) 12:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The competition is certainly notable. Previous competitions have been won by very notable performers. The fact that is going to take place all else being equal and is in preparation is not in doubt. My worry is that this is just a place holder for the event to come which is notable only for being the 100th anniversary. I still vote merge and create the article when the Competition is over — Iadmc ♫^talk 12:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep – looks like 3/4 reliable independent sources exist discussing it. Sources will only ramp up in the future. Seems useful to have a solid starting ground for a quick-moving event like this. Aza24 (talk) 18:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]