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. Hut 8.5 20:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony 'Pylo' White[edit]

Anthony 'Pylo' White (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

No evidence of any significant notability . A single mention in an Essex local paper doesn't make for Wikipedia notability. Fails WP:GNG by a wide margin  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:29, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete passing mention in one source is not enough to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:29, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:GNG, does not pass WP:MUSICBIO(for now at least) either--Kostas20142 (talk) 13:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:17, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Önder Çakırtaş[edit]

Önder Çakırtaş (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

No evidence of any significant notability . The references seem more about promoting his book rather than the person. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:26, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Notability not found. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:09, 11 April 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nom--Kostas20142 (talk) 13:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lowell Haines[edit]

Lowell Haines (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

In my opinion this fails WP:GNG, and having been created by a Single Purpose Account, maybe WP:SOAP applies here. Nicnote • ask me a question • contributions 23:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 00:37, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 00:37, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete.If Taylor University were a major academic institution WP:Prof#C6 would be satisfied. But it isn't. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC).[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Randazzo[edit]

Andrew Randazzo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG with only a few WP:ROUTINE sources. Fails WP:NHOCKEY (only award in the QMJHL with assumed notability is First Team All-Star or top-10 all time scorer, no awards in SPHL or LNAH have assumed notability). Yosemiter (talk) 22:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete does not have enough coverage to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:26, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Nomination has been withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Lepricavark (talk) 14:59, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of places named Cheyenne[edit]

List of places named Cheyenne (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Any places named Cheyenne should go in Cheyenne (disambiguation). This isn't a proper set index, and it's packed with partial title matches. (This is also part of an ongoing disagreement between me and the list's creator regarding what should or shouldn't go in the dab page.) Clarityfiend (talk) 22:20, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Regarding Cheyenne (disambiguation) and this page - there were long discussions about the disambiguation pages in the past, including and culminating in this archived discussion. Including the List of places page, which was a compromise kind of page for someone that wanted to expand the use of the Cheyenne disambiguation page.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:32, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that this discussion might be open to interpretation. The "List of places named Cheyenne" page was a compromised to resolve a page entitled Cheyenne, Colorado that was a list of every place with the word Cheyenne (or Cheyenne Mountain as I remember) in Colorado. Although I created the page as part of the resolution of that page, I don't have an opinion one way or the other whether it stays or goes. Today's stats say that it gets about 3 hits a day. I hadn't realized there was no link from Cheyenne (disambiguation) (15 hits/day), if there had been, it might have gotten more but not likely much more.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:41, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Withdraw nomination in the expectation it will get renamed the more accurate List of places named for the Cheyenne. It seems there are other lists of this sort. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:54, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:54, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Faqeer Noor Muhammad Sarwari Qadiri[edit]

Faqeer Noor Muhammad Sarwari Qadiri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Another one of a string of promotional articles by a Pakistani religious sect which get regularly posted on Wikipedia and then regularly deleted, usually despite protests from a herd of sockpuppets (see [1]).

An article supposedly about some translator of old Persian books into Urdu which, typically for the group, serves as a WP:COATRACK to promote the said cult. The article fails to assert notability of its subject, failing WP:NPERSON. Lack of sources/references does not help. — kashmiri ^TALK 22:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NOTADVERTISING and the basic WP:GNG. This seems like another non-notable translator who realized that Wikipedia gets more hits than GoodReads and thus needed a biography on the site. It seems like a fairly standard case. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:24, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - unsourced, unclear and promotional, less of the ideas, but more for the books, (one of several started by the same author) - Arjayay
• Delete per WP:SNOW - even 1000 sockpuppets !voting keep won't be able to save this article from being thrown into a volcano. Exemplo347 (talk) 14:01, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as notability is not there. Hyperbolick (talk) 15:35, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow; not much to add to the points brought up above. --HyperGaruda (talk) 08:00, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - as my nomination.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:08, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sukpum thaltawh[edit]

Sukpum thaltawh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

No evidence that this topic is notable, as demonstrated by a search for sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:05, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - not even sure it's a real thing, definitely no sources indicate notability.Glendoremus (talk) 18:32, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:10, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Charly Caruso[edit]

Charly Caruso (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Nikki♥311 21:55, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 21:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 22:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 22:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, unsourced. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 03:53, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a lack of sources to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unsourced. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 01:12, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:GNG....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails WP:GNG.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I tagged this article for both a lack of notability and a lack of significant independent sources and nothing has changed. Papaursa (talk) 03:22, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WCPW Pro Wrestling World Cup 2017[edit]

WCPW Pro Wrestling World Cup 2017 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Event for a promotion that has been previously deleted by AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/What Culture Pro Wrestling). Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Only WP:ROUTINE coverage exists. Nikki♥311 21:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Nikki♥311 21:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non-notable event for non-notable promotion.LM2000 (talk) 22:40, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Almost a speedy case. No claim to notability. Promotional in nature. AusLondonder (talk) 23:31, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ninja Cowboy Viking[edit]

Ninja Cowboy Viking (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Article about a fun family project that received some local coverage when it started a fundraiser.

Note: This is not about the upcoming adaptation ofCowboy Ninja Viking Mduvekot (talk) 21:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - film is currently unreleased. Unreleased films are typically not notable. I don't see any reliable sources that indicate it meets notability requirements. Beyond that, even if/when released, I doubt it will meet notability standards, but time will tell. Meanwhile, delete.Glendoremus (talk) 18:39, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Idaho-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ellie Raine[edit]

Ellie Raine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Author of single book who does not appear to have been the subject of significant coverage in independent sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:01, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Americas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 23:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I found no significant coverage. Her book appears to be non-notable also. SL93 (talk) 00:01, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - There is this from a local news source. It is a brief mention and the only thing I could find. No significant coverage and therefore fails WP:GNG. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:04, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as notability is not in the sources. Hyperbolick (talk) 15:43, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG. Her work does not meet WP:NBOOK. No additional coverage found. --Jack Frost (talk) 11:15, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No significant coverage and therefore fails WP:GNG.Dean Esmay (talk)
• Delete - No evidence of notability per WP:AUTHOR. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. tragic, but not notable enough to be encyclopedic. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:38, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio Ambush[edit]

Ohio Ambush (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

With respect to the victims or people who knew them, this tragic event does not meet notability guidelines. I believe the following passages are relevant:

• An event that is a precedent or catalyst for something else of lasting significance is likely to be notable.
• Notable events usually have significant impact over a wide region, domain, or widespread societal group. An event affecting a local area and reported only by the media within the immediate region may not necessarily be notable.
• Notable events usually receive coverage beyond a relatively short news cycle.

No indication is given in the article that this resulted in some societal or legal change. No sources are offered from outside Ohio which might also indicate this is notable. The articles cited all date from the time of the event.

I would add that this event doesn't seem to have been given a specific name like "Ohio Ambush". I'm sure there have been other events where such a name would apply. 331dot (talk) 19:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It goes without saying that this was a tragic incident but it is also one that has no lasting encyclopedic notability. No coverage beyond routine and local coverage. WP:GEOSCOPE applies here: "An event affecting a local area and reported only by the media within the immediate region may not necessarily be notable". AusLondonder (talk) 21:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:22, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Nomination "withdrawn" per WP:SKCRIT #1 now that Thincat changed !vote to keep. (non-admin closure) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 17:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth King (artist)[edit]

Elizabeth King (artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Background: see [2]. Most of the article content is based on a single Richmond Times-Dispatch article, to which the subject seems to strongly object (and I fail to see why, but that is immaterial).

I actually think that notability is clearly passed and the article should be kept, but DonFB (ping) has doubts about it. Moreover, it has been longstanding practice (see WP:BLPEDIT) that BLP subjects have some amount of control about "their" article when it comes to removing stuff of borderline encyclopedic interest; although the (alledged) subject of the article did not ask for outright deletion, it should be considered (since without the RTD source, not much remains). I therefore bring this for community consideration, even though I would myself support keeping it. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 18:26, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 18:26, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete according to WP:BIODELETE and WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE presuming it is the subject raising the matter and this is what she would prefer to happen. Thincat (talk) 19:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am withdrawing my "delete" because the the article now seems unobjectionable and deletion has not been requested. The subject is notable but I would still support deletion if she requests it. I also commented below. Thincat (talk) 09:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Since the objected material has been removed, I see no reason in not keeping the article. Especially since she has work in the permanent collections of The Metropolitan Museum of Art in NY, the Museum of Fine Arts Houston, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Virginia Museum of Fine Arts and other smaller museums as per [3]. Passes CREATIVE. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:52, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt the subject is notable (and thank you for improving the article to demonstrate this more clearly). However, we are not required to have an article on a subject just because they are notable. Due to our often uncouth editing (and sometimes even more uncouth AfD discussions!) these situations can deteriorate with complainants being told they are not notable and being advised against sockpuppetry, conflict of interest, autobiography and wikibabble what-not. However, since the subject did not request deletion I'll keep an eye on developments and maybe come back and change my vote. Thincat (talk) 08:12, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep As per Megalibrarygirl. With works being kept in the permanent collections of The Metropolitan Museum of Art in NY, and the Museum of Fine Arts, she has notability. Antonioatrylia (talk) 09:22, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep For the record, I commented at the Help Desk. I believe King meets the General Notability Guideline (wp:GNG) and the sub-guideline, "Creative Professional" (wp:Artist). Significant coverage in reliable independent sources is not overwhelming, but I think places her over the threshhold. Her works have been exhibited in many places, including major museums, so she meets "artist." The person who wrote to the Help Desk, self-identified as King, was clearly upset by the recently-revised WP article. She did not ask for deletion, but only removal of objectionable content. That has now been done. There is, of course, no guarantee that some other editor, or the same one, will not come along someday and reinsert quotations from the Richmond Times-Dispatch newspaper article that King disliked--and, in fact, a citation of that news article is listed on a page of one of her websites. I don't consider King a highly "public" person, so if she were to request deletion of the article, citing privacy concerns, I would support. DonFB (talk) 10:19, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, meets WP:NARTIST, article reflects this thanks to Megalibrarygirl, and ..ahem.. me, "your modesty, coola, is astounding", thankyou Coolabahapple (talk) 02:40, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as the notability is definitely there in the sources. Hyperbolick (talk) 15:47, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Elizabeth King is notable - actually, she quite famous, has been in featured in the Whitney Biennial, numerous publications, books, major museum collections, etc. Subject meets WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 22:52, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Included in several major collections. Meets WP:NARTIST & WP:GNG. --Jack Frost (talk) 11:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The key piece of information as far as keeping the article is mentioned above: "she has work in the permanent collections of The Metropolitan Museum of Art in NY, the Museum of Fine Arts Houston, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Virginia Museum of Fine Arts and other smaller museums as per[4] Ntherzone made a good point too which was; " she quite famous, has been in featured in the Whitney Biennial, numerous publications, books, major museum collections, etc. Subject meets WP:NARTIST and WP:GNG." Dean Esmay (talk) 03:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Subject meets notability guidelines, easily passing WP:GNG. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 19:13, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. Hmlarson (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kieran Mewse[edit]

Kieran Mewse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Does not appear to meet WP:RLN or WP:BIO. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:18, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:18, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not play in either of the two professional leagues in England.Fleets (talk) 09:16, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:RLN and does not otherwise meet GNG. Mattlore (talk) 20:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jamovi[edit]

Jamovi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Doesn't appear to be a notable software. Google only returns non-RS hits, and the sources in the article are either blogs or the download page. In short: fails WP:GNG. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:28, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:37, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I found no notability. SL93 (talk) 00:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I was researching this and was also going to AfD. Pet-projects aren't allowed on wiki, much less ones that don't pass WP:GNG. Best, Nicnote • ask me a question • contributions 10:01, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as I too cannot find notability in the sources. Hyperbolick (talk) 16:00, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No significant reliable coverage.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:40, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Hopkins[edit]

Patrick Hopkins (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Previously deleted. Extra content makes this ineligible for CSD G4 but still fails WP:NFOOTBALL. The player has started on the bench for a professional side but hasn't yet played for them. GoldenRing (talk) 17:25, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:52, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:52, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - he has not received significant coverage or played in a fully pro league, meaning the article still fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails NFOOTY as has not played or managed senior international football nor played or managed in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Fenix down (talk) 08:42, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 17:29, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Govvy (talk) 20:19, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete TOOSOON at the very least. South Nashua (talk) 18:17, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - non-notable soccer player.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:42, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedied as a WP:HOAX. Bearcat (talk) 17:43, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nick George (politician)[edit]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Swliv (talk) 17:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nick George (politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

This appears to be a created, fictional person. Work to date at Talk:Nick George (politician)#Suspect article; delete it? with no responses there. Swliv (talk) 17:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Favor deletion. Swliv (talk) 17:55, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm speedying this as a WP:HOAX. I don't have enough information to determine whether this is an outright fabrication about a person who doesn't exist at all, or a real person who's trying to self-promote by self-publishing false claims about himself, but it clearly falls under WP:HOAX either way. His name appears in none of the reliable sources that are present in the article, but is reflected only in the user-generated sources (IMDb, Geni, a press release credited to a non-existent publication and replicated on a press release distribution portal) that a person can easily hoax someone into — the only member of Melania Trump's communications staff I can verify in a reliable source is a woman named Stephanie Grisham. And for added bonus, how likely is it that Nick George is from the same town and attended the same high school as his predecessor Joanna Rosholm, rather than that part of the article simply being copy-pasted from Rosholm's? Bearcat (talk) 17:33, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Bodo singers[edit]

List of Bodo singers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Seems like an overspecific list article with only three names listed having articles. McGeddon (talk) 17:20, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - doesn't meet the requirements for being a stand-alone list (no evidence of WP:GNG) Spiderone 10:54, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per nom and fails WP:GNG. Jiten Dhandha • talk • contributions • 18:11, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:23, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Mathias[edit]

Ron Mathias (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Mathias cannot be presumed notable under NHOOP because the USBL, a spring league, is not under the guideline. Streetball and community college also do not help the case. He needs to meet GNG which is failed with the majority of the sources simply being passing mentions. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:37, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 14:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:46, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete being in the top 50 streetballers of all time is something you tell your grandkids about, not something that gets you on Wikipedia. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:55, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Being in the top 50 streetballers does not get you on Wikipedia. But having significant coverage in reliable sources does. The references in the article from the Sun Sentinel are sufficient to demonstrate notability, and it looks like he's been profiled in off-line sources such as Swee' Pea and Other Playground Legends. Pburka (talk) 03:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• The Sun Sentinel sources are human interest pieces that don't provide critical analysis or other coverage that we would ordinarily expect from sports figures who don't meet HOOPS to pass GNG. My earlier !vote was being a bit cute, but semi-professional to minor league athletes like this are going to get some coverage in sources. In other words, it is WP:ROUTINE. We tend to have a higher standard for them to pass GNG because the sports topic notability guidelines are generally very low. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:52, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Pburka could you please read TonyBallioni's response and reconsider your stance? Not trying to be pushy but your vote will most likely steer us to no consensus on a minor basketball player that does not pass notability standards of any kind.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I stand by my position. We assume notability of any sports player who's played a single top-level game, and many of them have far less coverage in reliable sources, over a much shorter time period, than does the subject of this article. We have far more information about Ron "Terminator" Matthias than we do about, e.g., a 19 year old athlete who once played Olympic handball. Given that mainstream news coverage continues to describe him as "legendary", I'd be surprised if a thorough search of specialized, off-line sources didn't yield a trove of additional sources. Pburka (talk) 13:55, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There's some routine sports coverage, but nothing I believe that shows he meets WP:GNG. In addition, he fails to meet WP:NHOOPS. Papaursa (talk) 02:47, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:25, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emam Ali (musician)[edit]

Emam Ali (musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

WP:BLP of a musician, who has no strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC and no indication of reliable source coverage. The only references here are YouTube videos, iTunes and a WP:ROUTINE directory, not real media coverage, and the closest thing to a strong notability claim is charting on a single standalone radio station (but NMUSIC requires IFPI-certified charts, which Arman FM is not.) As always, musicians are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they exist; to get a musician into Wikipedia, you have to be able to reference them a lot better than this. Bearcat (talk) 00:50, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:46, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tajikistan-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:46, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:46, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per above. Fatty wawa (talk) 03:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:47, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Buchanan[edit]

Aaron Buchanan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Much like his sister, Aaron doesn't seem to be known for anything outside of being a frontman. I can find no hits (news or otherwise) that do not simply list him as part of either Aaron Buchanan & The Cult Classics or Heaven's Basement (and the references currently used on the article do likewise). Notability is not inherited, and he's currently failing GNG and MUSICBIO. Primefac (talk) 01:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Weak keep He is a prominent member of two notable bands so I vote to keep per Criterion #6 of WP:MUSICBIO, for reasons explained by Jclemens here. Bennv3771 (talk) 02:42, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bennv3771, you make a fairly valid point, I'll strike that portion of my nomination. There is still the GNG issue, of course, which is a bit more important. Zero independent sources with significant coverage make it hard to demonstrate notability. Primefac (talk) 02:47, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac: Zero..? Although most of the sources provided in the main article were primary, there were still some which appeared to have some sort of reliability, and there seems to be at least some sort coverage of Aaron Buchanan from doing a quick google search, although wether those sources are significant and independent or not is up for debate. Morphdog (t - c) 19:03, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If they're primary, they don't demonstrate notability. If they're about the band he's in (and only mention him) it's not significant coverage. WP:42 isn't an either/or situation. Primefac (talk) 19:08, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Morphdog: This encyclopedia is based on reliable sources and our specific inclusion criteria requires independent reliable sources. You cannot establish notability (generally) without independent reliable sources. This is not an exception to the rule. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:11, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:43, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:43, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There just doesn't appear to be enough independent reliable coverage to warrant an article on this person. All the sources are primary and the most coverage he's gotten appears to be for leaving the band, followed by coverage of the person who replaced him. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:50, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as non-notable. Sure the reference section is full, but it's references regarding things that are notable (other bands, recording studios, places, etc.) Ifnord (talk) 20:03, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per NOTINHERITED. The lack of independent sourcing is what clinches this one for me. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:53, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 05:01, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mark McGowan (performance artist)[edit]

Mark McGowan (performance artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Non-notable artist. He has some media coverage, but not every artist who gets coverage is notable. His work doesn't seem to have attracted much attention or been very influential. Article relies too heavily on primary sources. Fails WP:ARTIST and WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. Lexiconoflife (talk) 06:09, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Maybe this artist is a little bit niche but he is quite active and has produced work in relation to the recent US presidential elections and has work in progress regarding the UK's Brexit process that is not included in the article. The article is somewhat stale and definitely needs attention and bringing up to date, but there is potential for this artist's work to become much more widely known and a deletion at this stage might be rather premature. Poltair (talk) 19:41, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep, he clearly meets WP:GNG with several of his stunts/artworks being covered in the major press. There are over 20 news articles already cited from the quality press, and several from the Daily Mail too. Though evidently, as the clean-up templates suggest, the Wikipedia article is over-reliant in parts to McGowan's YouTube site. Sionk (talk) 18:40, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I agree he is somewhat niche, he like Poltair said he compensates by being very productive and produces material about contemporary affairs. For example, produced work in relation to the recent US presidential elections that was popular. And I his work in progress regarding the UK's Brexit process should also be good. This article should be improved and not deleted. And the press he has obtained because of all of this definitely makes him notable. Dean Esmay (talk)

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Satchel's Pizza[edit]

Satchel's Pizza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

This is a run-of-the-mill business and the article reads as a promotion. I acknowledge that this article survived an AfD five years ago, but I believe that WP has more robust notability guidelines now, for example at WP:NGEO. NoGhost (talk) 09:57, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep I believe that Satchel's Pizza fits the criteria for notability. It is a significant part of Gainesville's culture and has received wide coverage from newspapers and reviewers. To compare it to some existing articles, it's similar in scope to the 34th Street Wall, Alec Courtelis Award, and Constans Theatre, all of which have longstanding articles and similar or lesser outside coverage.

From the WP:NGEO page that you linked,

"Buildings, including private residences and commercial developments may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability."

Satchel's is a well-known business in Gainesville that has been covered extensively by local newspapers and a number of outside ones:

Jacksonville newspaper article that features Satchel's Pizza and covers its history

New York Times article that mentions Satchel's Pizza and acknowledges it as being locally famous.

Tampa Bay Times article mentioning Satchel's alongside all of Gainesville's other landmarks, including the Hippodrome State Theater, Florida Museum of Natural History, Payne's Prairie, and Devil's Millhopper.

Numerous articles from the local media such as the Gainesville Sun, The Alligator, WUFT, and WCJB.

It is the most reviewed Gainesville restaurant on TripAdvisor and the second most on Yelp, which demonstrates its popularity.

Regarding your claim that the article reads like a promotion, which sentences do you believe are out of place? All of the contents on the page help to establish the restaurant's notability and were in place during the original AfD. When I created the article, I included parts about the long wait times and the widely used bumper stickers because they show its local significance. If you feel that the article's wording is poor, then that's a good reason for cleanup and expansion, not deletion. --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 18:57, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep refernces given above meet GNG. MartinJones (talk) 18:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - "Run of the mill" business aren't covered in-depth by multiple reliable sources both local or non-local as this business which clearly demonstrates passing WP:N has.--Oakshade (talk) 20:59, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per above. --doncram 02:08, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, There has been a number of notable matters brought up which are: 1) "I believe that Satchel's Pizza fits the criteria for notability. It is a significant part of Gainesville's culture and has received wide coverage from newspapers and reviewers. To compare it to some existing articles, it's similar in scope to the 34th Street Wall, Alec Courtelis Award, and Constans Theatre, all of which have longstanding articles and similar or lesser outside coverage." 2) Jacksonville newspaper article that features Satchel's Pizza and covers its history: New York Times article that mentions Satchel's Pizza and acknowledges it as being locally famous; Tampa Bay Times article mentioning Satchel's alongside all of Gainesville's other landmarks, including the Hippodrome State Theater, Florida Museum of Natural History, Payne's Prairie, and Devil's Millhopper; Numerous articles from the local media such as the Gainesville Sun, The Alligator, WUFT, and WCJB. Dean Esmay (talk)

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

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

The result was delete. and salt. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:26, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pranjal Singh[edit]

Pranjal Singh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

The was tagged for speedy deletion but the tag was removed by the author and an IP user. There is not sufficient evidence of notability per WP:GNG and WP:Notability. In news, finding articles about an activist / student and finding nothing in CSE search. –CaroleHenson (talk) 10:39, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 11:16, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:14, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I found during research into a potential sockpuppet issue that there have been multiple attempts to create this article. If the decision is to deleted, can the article be WP:Salted?–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:12, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Whilst there is fleeting coverage of the subject in a couple of newspapers, there is nothing available which establishes notability. Fails WP:GNG --Jack Frost (talk) 09:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as promotionalism; no indications of notability or significance. Salt as well. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:04, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades ^Godric 04:41, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Minit Records[edit]

Minit Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Article fails WP:GNG, seems to only have re-released certain songs (regardless of notability), and has merely one source from a fan-led "company biography" page. Lordtobi (✉) 11:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 14:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - uh, sourcing needs desperate improvement, but did you read the whole article? Notable label. This is the label massive hit "Mother in Law" appeared on. This label had other hits as well. WP:BEFORE definitely applies, just do a simple search on Google Books on Minit Records [5]. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:24, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No significant coverage and Google Books only shows trivial mentions. SL93 (talk) 00:04, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed to Keep: Per the sources below (except for the first source which is more about a different label). SL93 (talk) 17:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SL93: I hope I don't sound like I'm badgering you, because I REALLY respect your work (and I respect the nominator also, if it appeared otherwise I apologize). However, there is a whole chapter in Rhythm and Blues in New Orleans by John Broven ([6]) plus discussions surrounding the label throughout the book. There is significant coverage (p.229-230) at The Music Lover's Guide to Record Collecting by Dave Thompson ([7]). There is useful information at Louisiana Rocks!: The True Genesis of Rock and Roll by Tom Aswell ([8]), this is more than a passing mention. I Hear You Knockin': The Sound of New Orleans Rhythm and Blues by Jeff Hannusch ([9]) should be used regarding the nomenclature, unfortunately Books only has a snippet view. The Sound of the City: The Rise of Rock & Roll by Charlie Gillett calls Minit "The most important New Orleans record label". There is significant coverage in Billboard [10], [11], [12], these from first page results searching

" "Minit Records" Billboard". 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 11:38, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, regarding the "first source", there's a whole chapter there, it is just hidden because the whole book isn't included in Google Books. (chapter 17) 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:59, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per 78.26. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 05:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon is selling a CD set of just original R&B songs from the Minit Label. https://www.amazon.com/Minit-Records-Story-Various-Artists/dp/B000008NEH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.184.86.255 (talk) 06:02, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE given the low input. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Rabinowitz[edit]

Bill Rabinowitz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

A sports writer. Two state and town level awards are claimed, one is sourced. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:38, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:04, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:04, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:19, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:19, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- a promotional CV on a subject that does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:20, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE given the low input. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beanz N Kornbread[edit]

Beanz N Kornbread (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

No evidence of any notability. Poorly formatted article that seemed to have been under construction in Draft for many hours and then dumped into main-space without review. It would be better back in Draft to work on improvement (if possible). Out here in main space if fails WP:GNG  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   15:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. WP:SOFTDELETE given the low input. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sanrio World Smash Ball![edit]

Sanrio World Smash Ball! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Contested WP: PROD. Fails to meet WP: NGAMES. No indication of importance, and both of the cited sources have only simple database information. The contesting editor stated "I would suggest a redirect", but doesn't suggest any target for the redirect, and neither the publisher nor developer of the game has an article. Martin IIIa (talk) 15:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Martin IIIa (talk) 15:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - It could be redirected to Sanrio or List of SNES games. Sergecross73 msg me 16:07, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think redirecting to Sanrio is appropriate, since that article doesn't cover this game at all, not even as part of a simple list. I can see the logic in redirecting to List of SNES games, but I was under the impression that we ordinarily don't redirect to "List of [platform] games" articles. I mean, every single game in existence has had a target platform, whether it was a released game, unreleased game, or even a proposed project which never entered development, yet we do sometimes delete articles on games at AfD rather than redirect them.--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Older Office Lady: Using Her Seductive Tongue[edit]

Older Office Lady: Using Her Seductive Tongue (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

A directory-like listing on an unremarkable film. The article went through an AfD (with a 'no consensus' result) but is not better for it -- there's no encyclopedically relevant prose as to why this film is significant or if it had any impact on the popular culture. The award listed is not significant, falling too short of WP:NFILM.

The previous discussion included arguments on the overall importance of the genre, which is not relevant to this specific article. Significant RS coverage not found. Please also see recent AfDs on a similar subject:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cousin White Paper: Aching Mature Lewdness (2nd nomination)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fascinating Woman: The Temptation of Creampie (2nd nomination)

K.e.coffman (talk) 01:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:11, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, as there is no real evidence that this is a notable film. One of the main claims to fame of this text is that it won an award for Sixth Best Film. I agree that it is not significant. Clawsyclaw (talk) 09:14, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per my arguments in the initial AFD. "Winning" a "sixth place" award would in most competitions be regarded as "not winning". The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 12:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kira Breed-Wrisley[edit]

Kira Breed-Wrisley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Although the article asserts that Kira Breed-Wrisley's "works have won awards from the Ivy Film Festival and the Syracuse International Film Festival, among others," it provides no references for any awards. A more substantial narrative and better references are needed to establish notability. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:05, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:06, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:16, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel K. Freeman[edit]

Daniel K. Freeman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

There are a lot of Daniel Freemans on the internet; however I don't think I can easily find any sources bar the ones listed in the article to improve it. Since there's nowhere obvious to redirect the biography to, I feel deletion is the only option left. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:46, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is a mish-mash of two different Daniel Freemans (freemen?). One is Daniel K. Freeman, with degrees from the universities of Essex and Manchester, patent holder for Voice Activity Detector, now a consultant. The other is Daniel Freeman, an Oxford professior with a PhD in clinical psychology. The book and official website link are his. There may be a case for an article for the professor. It is very hard to find enough references for an article for a person whose research was done in an industrial setting. StarryGrandma (talk)

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bobaflex[edit]

Bobaflex (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Declined G4. Has no visible verifiable references from reliable sources. Fails to meet WP:BAND, WP:GNG, and WP:BLP (re band members).   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A WP:BEFORE search brings up only passing mentions, rarely in reliable sources ([13]), blogs ([14]), etc. The few mentions in RS are generally in the context of festivals, with other gruppes (WP:NOTINHERITED), [15]. Mind you, their version of Hey You is pretty cool :) — O Fortuna ^{velut luna} 17:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Unfortunately there were not sources available to show it should be included in the 2006 AfD, and that has not altered with time. MartinJones (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:21, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:21, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 05:02, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo[edit]

Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

One half of the notable electronic duo Daft Punk but no indication of independent notability. Merge or redirect to Daft Punk.

Also nominating:
(1) Crydamoure (vanity label of Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo)
- TheMagnificentist 15:56, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Subject has produced a number of notable works without Bangalter, for example Sexuality (album) and Outrun (album). See also WP:MUSICBIO, as was pointed out in the similar deletion discussion about the Bangalter article. I would agree that the Guy-Man de Homem-Christo article needs some work, but that has more to do with lack of editor interest than lack of notability as an individual subject. jhsounds (talk) 22:03, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:39, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Procedural keep on Crydamoure. Crydamoure is not a "vanity label" as it has numerous releases from artists other than Homem-Christo. It's fair to say it started as a vanity label, but subsequent releases indicate it grew from there. I am not commenting on the notability or lack thereof on the Crydamoure label, but it needs to be considered on its own merits independent of its founder, therefore I am requesting a procedural keep here, and a separate AfD nomination if appropriate. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:24, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:26, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Section 84[edit]

Section 84 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Shelved movie per [16]. Article was made before principal photography commenced. Currently the article is a mess and has been spammed as much as possible. Fails WP:NFILM and was a case of WP:TOSOON. Jupitus Smart 16:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:HAMMER. It is unclear if this has actually been released widely. Bearian (talk) 19:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a film which apparently hasn't even been made yet (principal photography was cancelled), and may not ever actually be made. There are numerous aborted projects in the film industry, and the vast majority (if not all) of them will not be notable enough for an article. In order for such an aborted film project to be notable enough for an article, it would need to be somehow exceptional, and I don't see any evidence this is exceptional. SJK (talk) 20:24, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:27, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Bernhardt[edit]

Justin Bernhardt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG per only WP:ROUTINE sources. Fails WP:NHOCKEY by not playing in a high enough league or for not long enough (needed 200 games in AHL, only had 14) and the second team all star is not a noted award for inclusion (needed First Team for the WHL). Yosemiter (talk) 16:40, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:36, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:36, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:37, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Some routine sports coverage and no achievements that meet WP:NHOCKEY means there's nothing to show he's WP notable. Papaursa (talk) 03:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daymen Rycroft[edit]

Daymen Rycroft (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG per only WP:ROUTINE sources. Never played in a high enough league or won any major awards to pass WP:NHOCKEY (best he had was most goals in a season in low minor league and All-Rookie team). Yosemiter (talk) 16:44, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to fail - confirming Yosemiters conclusions Bill McKenna (talk) 21:38, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 19:42, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 19:42, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Ifnord (talk) 19:39, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Making the all-rookie team and playing on a team that won a collegiate conference championship are insufficient to meet WP:NHOCKEY and the coverage appears to be just routine sports reporting. Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NHOCKEY. Papaursa (talk) 03:11, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:27, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Suderman[edit]

Matt Suderman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG per only WP:ROUTINE sources. Fails WP:NHOCKEY with no awards or high enough level of play. Yosemiter (talk) 16:52, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 19:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 19:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Coverage appears to be routine sports reporting and I couldn't find anything to show he meets WP:NHOCKEY. Papaursa (talk) 03:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Maxwell[edit]

Dennis Maxwell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG per only WP:ROUTINE sources (which are not used here, but that is what I found on my search in my judgement). The previous vote was KEEP based on what appears to be erroneous info on the wikipedia page to pass the 200 game mark for WP:NHOCKEY. There is no actual evidence that he played for the Atlanta Knights in the 1993–94 season. In fact it was likely impossible to play 58 professional games that season while also playing 58 OHL games. Per this source and this source he played 182 regular season games and 9 playoff games between the AHL and IHL. This is just short of the requirements. Since he has won no awards, his lengthy career in the lower minor leagues appears to be non-notable as given by his apparent lack of non-routine coverage. Yosemiter (talk) 17:14, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 18:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 18:59, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:32, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete He lacks significant independent coverage to meet WP:GNG and also fails to meet WP:NHOCKEY. Papaursa (talk) 02:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Delete. Hut 8.5 20:54, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Bale[edit]

Jonathan Bale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

fails WP:NHOCKEY and WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 21:40, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Reach Out to the Truth 05:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Reach Out to the Truth 05:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:19, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete His appearance for Australia at the "world championships" was several levels below what is necessary to meet WP:NHOCKEY and the coverage is not enough to meet WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 02:52, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As per nomination and per the above --Kostas20142 (talk) 13:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vivian Carrero[edit]

Vivian Carrero (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Fails WP:BIO. Being a columnist for NotiMillos.com saves her from CSD-A7. Kleuske (talk) 22:14, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Are there any sources from Columbia (the country of origin of the subject, Vivian Carrero) in Spanish that might be used to substantiate her notability here? Bmbaker88 (talk) 23:16, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:18, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:18, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:18, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:18, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- notability not established by "Vivian is part of the group of columnists for the site NotiMillos.com,[3] where she writes about the team of their loves, Millonarios FC." K.e.coffman (talk) 18:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not notable and only appears to write a fan blog. Kierzek (talk) 19:19, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no claim to notability Spiderone 10:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Non-notable subject; fails to meet WP:ANYBIO. Does not otherwise meet WP:GNG. --Jack Frost (talk) 11:11, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - can't find reliable sources.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:46, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to orchestra. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch orchestra (type of orchestra)[edit]

Scratch orchestra (type of orchestra) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Definition of a phrase with little scope for further expansion, WP:NOT#DICTIONARY Verbcatcher (talk) 16:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find definition of scratch orchestra in any standard dictionary online. Therefore i felt uncomfortable adding it to wiktionary. There is a ballet article in Wikipedia that mentions scratch orchestra. I believe it is powerful if it link to an article in Wikipedia that tells what a scratch orchestra is with some sources. There is room for expansion. There could be a description of the problems of assembling a scratch orchestra, for example. Greg Dahlen (talk) 20:46, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that the article is converted into a paragraph in orchestra, and replaced with a redirect to it. See also User talk:Verbcatcher#why i began scratch orchestra article. Verbcatcher (talk) 15:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:23, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/Redirect to orchestra per Verbcatcher's proposal. SJK (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Undisclosed paid editing NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RentSeeker.ca[edit]

RentSeeker.ca (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Recreation on the same day it had already been speedied, by a sock and evident edit-for-hire editor, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/IMZahidIqbal. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pocket Maar[edit]

Pocket Maar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

The article was made before the movie commenced principal photography. All the sources are dead, and on searching no sources turn up which indicate that the movie went beyond its planning stage. Besides the director has died since then, and the main actress has stopped her acting career. Fails WP:NFILM and is a case of WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. Jupitus Smart 15:52, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:25, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:25, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete An "Upcoming movie" over seven years old with a release date a year and a half ago? Is development hell really that bad in Bollywood? Regardless, either the movie exists in some form and it's WP:TOOSOON (as @Jupitus Smart: states, or it doesn't and there's no reason for the article. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:10, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Redirect to Charlie Fink#Discography with the option of merging if anyone wants to. Hut 8.5 21:05, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Fink discography[edit]

Charlie Fink discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

WP:TOOSOON. I see no necessity for a discography of someone who has barely released more records than I have. It can clearly be contained in the biog. TheLongTone (talk) 15:49, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• MOS:DISCOGRAPHY backs up the nomination, as I read it. Delete per nom. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Charlie Fink#Discography, and please do that through normal editing next time rather than starting an AFD first. postdlf (talk) 18:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Charlie Fink#Discography per above comments. Aoba47 (talk) 20:30, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:57, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Delete. It's been established that the subject doesn't meet WP:NFOOTBALL (not yet, anyway) and nobody has argued that he meets WP:GNG. The article can be restored or recreated if that situation ever changes. Hut 8.5 21:01, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Šimon Štefanec[edit]

Šimon Štefanec (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator on the grounds that he plays for a Serie B club. While accurate, this does not confer notability as he has yet to actually play in Serie B, meaning the article still fails WP:NSPORT. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep He plays in Serie B team, mostly in Campionato Nazionale Primavera he is also member of Slovakia national under-19 football team^[1]

(User talk:Svk fan) 17:37, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Being on a squad is not enough, he needs to play. GiantSnowman 17:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - he is still young and will play soon (User talk:Svk fan) 20:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Svk fan: Speculation as to future appearances is never grounds for notability, and WP:NFOOTBALL explicitly excludes youth footballers. Also, please do not !vote more than once. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:20, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Now he is with Slovakia U20 team ^[2] if he will cancelled now, it will be needed to create him again soon again, and I am curious who will do... (User talk:Svk fan) 21:30, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per WP:TOOSOON very few footballers pass WP:NFOOTY & WP:GNG before the age of 20. Article can always be recreated or undeleted in the future. Inter&anthro (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovakia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]