This page transcludes all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.

Recent AfDs:    Today    Yesterday      April 20 (Sat)      April 19 (Fri)      April 18 (Thu)     More... Media   Organisations   Biography   Society   Web   Games   Science   Arts   Places   Indiscern.  Not-Sorted

Purge server cache

Stumble Guys

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

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

Fails the general notability guidelines, with no critic reviews in sight and limited sourcing on the game in general. I managed to find one "review" from Pure Xbox [1], but I don't think that is enough to save this article. λ NegativeMP1 20:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. λ NegativeMP1 20:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Rossouw

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

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

Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG. All that comes up in my searches are trivial mentions in match reports and lineup announcements. JTtheOG (talk) 20:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 20:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Gill (priest)

Arthur Gill (priest) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There appears to be insufficient notability for this priest. Chumpih ^t 19:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Ireland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by Hum Europe

List of programs broadcast by Hum Europe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is a simple listing without contextual information and falls under WP:NOTTVGUIDE. The few references available are about individual programming and not the programming as a whole. Fails WP:NLIST. CNMall41 (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, Pakistan, Europe, and United Kingdom. CNMall41 (talk) 19:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mehmet Abbasoğlu (businessman)

Mehmet Abbasoğlu (businessman) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails GNG or relevant specefic criteia. Not enough independent significant coverage.

• Source 1: Petrol Ofisi reached a market share of 23.09 percent (translated), Reliable? Unknown (likely), Independent? Yes, Significant coverage? No
• Source 2:Petrol Ofisi CEO Abbasoğlu: Our only bottleneck is our roads (translated) Reliable? Not likely, Significant coverage? No (Routine coverage of a conference, only quotes the CEO's statement)
• 3:Petrol Ofisi Group accelerates investments in line with Turkey's national energy strategy, Reliable? Not likely (State-run), Significant coverage? No (About company announcements, not the subject of the article)
• 4:Vitol-owned Petrol Ofisi agrees to purchase BP’s Turkish fuel operations, Reliable? Unknown, Independent? No (Publisher owns the company), Significant coverage? No (One-line mention)
• 5:404-error
• 6:Turkey’s Petrol Ofisi announces new chief executive officer, Reliable? No (Likely an advertisement), Independent? No (Likely an advertisement, no bylines, promotional tone, likely WP:RSNOI applies), Significant coverage? No (Mainly discusses company position changes, not the subject)
• 7:Change of general manager at Petrol Ofisi, Press release citing company statement
• 8:How A Gritty Market Leader Transformed Out Of A ‘Doomed’ Industry, Forbes contributor promo, not reliable by itself, further it's mostly an interview so primary source
• 9:Mehmet Abbasoğlu became the General Manager of Petrol Ofisi, similar to source 7, Press release citing a company statement
• Sources 10-16, more of the same. Waste of time and energy detailing here.

X (talk) 19:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Turkey, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Excluding the material from Forbes and sources where the person is an employee or director, the references seem fine. These are all valid references for a corporate executive. Newspaper articles aren't press releases; while a company announcement may be the starting point for a newspaper story about an executive appointment, the newspaper makes its own decisions about whether the announcement is newsworthy and what to include. Anadolu Agency is a legitimate news agency despite being state-run, although some caution is needed when considering its coverage of politics. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 21:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kristy Kiernan

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

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

Does not meet WP:AUTHOR

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, and Florida. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AmericaSpeaks

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

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

Article with a promotional history; this version started out simply as a copy of a promotional version deleted as spam, and it hasn't gotten any better. There's no proof or even indication that this was ever a notable organization by our standards, and the lack of references reflects that. Drmies (talk) 18:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A closed org with no significant coverage in a long time. Clear failure of WP:10YT Simonm223 (talk) 18:52, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:NCORP and 10YT. By the way, a related AfD here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/California_Speaks Graywalls (talk) 18:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, United States of America, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Since its closure in 2014, there has not been a single reliable source covering the organization. It fails WP:NCORP's inclusion criteria. Nitish shetty (talk) 11:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The relevant standard is WP:ORG as it was a nonprofit, and there are many reliable sources covering the organization since its closure in 2014 cited within the article per my comments below. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per nom. and others. Fails WP:GNG/WP:NCORP. Sal2100 (talk) 19:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sal2100: Request reconsideration in light of the below. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:42, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See below, !vote changed to "keep". Thanks for pinging me. Sal2100 (talk) 17:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:GNG and WP:ORG and WP:HEY. The article about this nonpartisan non-profit organization has now gone through a complete WP:TNT, with all the promotional, unsourced content removed. (Drmies and Graywalls rightly got the ball rolling with removing content that should have been removed years ago.) There are numerous articles covering AmericaSpeaks in independent, reliable secondary sources including academic journal articles and books, demonstrating WP:SUSTAINED interest over time. Among the most in-depth analysis is Francesca Polletta's chapter, "Publics, Partners, and the Ties That Bind" which appeared in Inventing Ties That Bind, a book published by the University of Chicago Press in 2020 and published by Chicago Scholarship Online in 2021. Another article is "Balancing the Books: Analyzing the Impact of a Federal Budget Deliberative Simulation on Student Learning and Opinion" by Dena Levy and Susan Orr, which was published in the Journal of Political Science Education in 2014. Another is the chapter "A Political Life Transformed" by John Gastil and Katherine R. Knobloch, which appeared in their book Hope for Democracy: How Citizens Can Bring Reason Back Into Politics, which was published by Oxford University Press in 2020. (All articles are accessible via Wikipedia Library or its partner publishers.) There are many other sources now cited in the article besides. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:42, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Cielquiparle and WP:HEY. With recent modifications, the article now passes WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Sal2100 (talk) 17:49, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heights and weights of US presidents

Heights and weights of US presidents (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE and failure to meet WP:LISTN. In addition, we also already have Heights of presidents and presidential candidates of the United States. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, and United States of America. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Di (they-them) (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khan Garh Tehsil

Khan Garh Tehsil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Reviewed during NPP. I think two reasons for the nomination. No indication of notability under GNG or SNG. SNG would be the only possibility and not even the requirements for that are met. More simply, the only reference give does not even mention it and in a search I can't find anything to even confirm that it even exists, not even on Google maps. North8000 (talk) 18:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Pakistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The place exist. See Khangarh, Sindh, this and this--—Saqib (talk | contribs) 19:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those (sourceless pages in the Wayback machine) are for Khangarh which already has a Wikipedia article. Khangarh, Sindh North8000 (talk) 21:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khan Garh and Khangarh are same. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 07:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: Thanks. So I think that that reinforces that it already has an article? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the sources found by Saqib. Mccapra (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See above. Those are for Khangarh which already has a Wikipedia article. Khangarh, Sindh North8000 (talk) 21:46, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

but the city and the tehsil are two different things. Mccapra (talk) 21:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mccapra: ??? I don't understand. Saqib gave sources for Khangarh and said that it's the same thing as this AFD. You said keep based on those sources, but when I said Khangarh already has an article you said that this AFD article is not the same thing. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saqib’s sources verify that Khangarh/Khan Garh is a local government area (tehsil). As a local government area any tehsil is notable. Tehsils may or may not be approximately similar to towns, and the fact that we already have an article on the town doesn’t mean we shouldn’t also have an article on the tehsil. Is what I meant. Mccapra (talk) 23:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The article has only one reference which is dead but is archived at the wayback machine. And what's at the wayback machine does not even mention the topic. That said, I'm going to step back and let others decide. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 01:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for the same reason that we have articles on Schenectady County, New York and Schenectady, New York. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The question isn't whether or not a Tehsil is suitable to have an article. The question is: do we have a suitable source that says that the TEHSIL of Khan Garh exists? North8000 (talk) 02:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[2] [3] [4] and [5] all easily available from Ghotki District show that Khan Garh or Khangarh is a verifiable tehsil/taluka. Eluchil404 (talk) 05:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Phil Bridger. Local government units at the Tehsil level are routinely kept on Wikipedia even in the absence of GNG level sourcing. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More policy-based discussion is needed. Just because something exists, does not make it notable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment To simplify, I'd agree (and already agreed) that a Tehsil meets NGeo should be kept without needing GNG sources. I looked at all of the sources noted, and from what I can see none of them is a wiki-suitable confirms that the TEHSIL of Khan Garh exists. The only reference in the article is to a sources list in the wayback machine which seems to say it doesn't exist. Others are ambiguous, don't say that it is a Tehsil, and seem to be referring to Khangarh, Sindh . Others are to blank sourceless pages in the wayback machine (including the only two cites at the Ghotki District article and even those don't really say that it exists. Can somebody find ONE wp:RS that clearly says that it exists as a Tehsil? And maybe even put it in the article because the article currently the article has ZERO wp:RS sources, and even the one non-RS source that it has (a sourceless page in the wayback machine) doesn't even claim that it exists. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  You seem to being deliberately obtuse here, as Eluchil404 in his reply to you above listed sources (I checked the first and the third, which is enough) that confirm that this is a tehsil. If you didn't know that a taluka is the same as a tehsil then just look in your favourite encyclopedia. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please quit the "deliberately" crap. Beyond that, I've done my best here. I'm going to unwatch this and let y'all decide. Anybody please ping me if I may be of assistance. North8000 (talk) 21:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Moore (bluegrass musician)

John Moore (bluegrass musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article has no sources and no indication of notability. It was nominated for deletion nearly 20 years ago and has not been improved since it was created in 2005. The subject does not meet any of the guidelines listed in WP:NMUSIC nor WP:NBIO.

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Aneirinn (talk) 17:57, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - It is important to note that the WP:NMUSICIAN requirements have gotten much tougher since 2006, when this article survived an AfD discussion pretty much because the gentleman was visible on the Internet. Meanwhile, the current version of the article could possibly be speedy deleted under WP:A7 because it makes no attempt to say how/if he is notable. At any rate, the gentleman is a perennial sideman and local performer who is surely good at what he does, but he has not received the in-depth media coverage that is necessary here, and is only visible in typical streaming and promotional services. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Byron Berline: I searched but could not find in-depth coverage about Moore. It's not an easy search because of his name and he's played at many bluegrass festivals so a lot hot hits to wade through but I did add a couple sources at least for verification. He was in Berline's band California which won International Bluegrass Music Association Instrumental Group of the Year three years in a row and Moore is mentioned in article. He also taught mandolin to Nickel Creek's Chris Thile and Sean Watkins which might qualify for WP:NMUSICOTHER #3 or #5 but I think that's a weak claim. S0091 (talk) 16:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 18:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extinction Level Event

Extinction Level Event (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Dubious dabpage that implies that a plot point in Deep Impact is the primary topic for this phrase. Recommend a primary redirect to Extinction Level Event: The Final World Front; the DIFFCAPS Extinction level event already redirects to Extinction event. 162 etc. (talk) 18:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beni Ebeid Stadium

Beni Ebeid Stadium (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No refs on the page for many years. Not seeing much which could be included however the sources may not be in English. JMWt (talk) 11:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. JMWt (talk) 11:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. No located sources.

🇺🇲JayCubby✡ please edit my user page! Talk 15:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Beni Ebeid SC as ATD. Definitely not notable. Mccapra (talk) 16:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Sport of athletics. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:50, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge and redirect to Beni Ebeid, the town it's in. The stadium isn't owned by the football club, they just operate there. The football club Beni Ebeid SC also needs to be merged into the town article. As it doesn't pass WP:SIGCOV, WP:GNG. Govvy (talk) 10:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Beni Ebeid SC as above; not even mentioned at the town article. GiantSnowman 19:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I sent Beni Ebeid SC to AfD, so now it's an inappropriate target! And it is mentioned in the town article now! :/ Govvy (talk) 10:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I think it needs fixing rather than deletion! Similar to what I've done to Beni Ebeid SC, I'll update this article one with new content in the nearest possible time. Ben5218 (talk) 14:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've updated the article and added references. It's still a stub, but I think that's enough to keep it. Thoughts, everyone? @GiantSnowman, @Govvy, @Mccapra, @JayCubby.

  Ben5218 (talk) 10:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment thanks for finding these Ben5218 but a Facebook post and two pieces of coverage saying the name of the stadium is changing don’t make it notable. I still a merge and redirect to either the club or the town is best. Mccapra (talk) 14:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. GiantSnowman 17:59, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That Facebook post contains a video discussing the stadium's and club's history, though, and only one reference covers the name change, not two. Since my last comment here, another four references were added (I can find and add more easily, if needed), and I also added more content. This topic definitely passes WP:GNG now, in my opinion. Ben5218 (talk) 18:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 16:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep per the sources currently in the article. Decent enough coverage about an Egyptian topic. Geschichte (talk) 08:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Girabola seasons

List of Girabola seasons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Per WP:NLIST and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. The list of seasons can already be found in the main article Girabola, another duplicate article being unnecessary. Svartner (talk) 09:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Angola, and Lists. Svartner (talk) 09:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Shouldn't you include everything linked to? Category:Girabola seasons Dream Focus 11:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• No, Svartner doesn't advocate deletion of the individual seasons, just the overarching list - which adds exactly nothing to the category. Geschichte (talk) 16:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Exactly, my question is whether there is a separate list if the main article already includes a list of seasons. Svartner (talk) 20:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Its unneeded. also kind of goes against WP:NOTDIRECTORY. The way the article is made, it may as well just be a category page. Shadow311 (talk) 19:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The seasons are listed in the template. If no other information is in the list article, it becomes pointless. Dream Focus 23:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and expand/improve, in-line with List of Premier League seasons etc. This is Morocco's Angola's top football competition. GiantSnowman 18:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment (I am at abstained vote here.) This list could be more useful if done right. As GS pointed out we do have them. And @GiantSnowman: this is the Angolan league, not the Moroccan! :/ Govvy (talk) 19:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry, getting Girabola mixed up with Botola! GiantSnowman 20:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete without prejudice - at the moment this is a duplicative, unnecessary article, but there's the potential for a better article here if someone wants to create something more detailed. SportingFlyer T·C 20:01, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Svartner, Shadow311, Dream Focus, Govvy, and SportingFlyer: I have started the process of converting into a proper list a la List of Premier League seasons, just need someone with time and knowledge to help... GiantSnowman 20:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Using RSSSF which lists all the champs... GiantSnowman 20:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ...and I've just noticed has pages for every individual season, such as 1979, 1980 etc. As such, if you still don't want to keep, please agree to draftify so I can work on it. GiantSnowman 20:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No problem with draftification, but I do hope it's more comprehensive than just what's on the Girabola page. SportingFlyer T·C 15:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ...which it would be if you check my edits to this article... GiantSnowman 20:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There is a big difference between the Premier League and the Angolan championship. The list of seasons is duplicated, as it is also included in the main article Girabola. Svartner (talk) 00:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Girabola#Girabola_participation_details list all the information doesn't it? Dream Focus 02:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That section is absolutely incomprehensible! I have deleted. GiantSnowman 20:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I'm with GiantSnowman here. This article needs work, but that is not a reason for deletion, especially if it not an obvious WP:TNT. This article has a lot of potential à la List of Premier League seasons, so it's not a TNT. Anwegmann (talk) 23:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shauna Vollmer King

Shauna Vollmer King (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:BLP of a writer and organizational founder, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria. As always, neither writers nor founders of organizations are automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source media coverage about their work -- but this is referenced entirely to glancing namechecks of her existence as a provider of soundbite in articles about other things or people, which is not what it takes: we're not looking for sources in which she speaks about someone or something else, we're looking for sources that are about her.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to show much, much better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore Choral Arts Society

Baltimore Choral Arts Society (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No refs on the page for many years. I see some mentions and directories and possibly even programmes for performances, but I'm not seeing the level of substantial independent reliable sourcing needed to meet the inclusion criteria on en.wiki JMWt (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Maryland. JMWt (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There's plenty of WP:SIGCOV [6] - article needs work but that's not grounds for deletion. Simonm223 (talk) 17:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok great, please add the strongest sources to the page that show the notability criteria have been met. JMWt (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  How about you do it instead. Simonm223 (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The news sources you've provided are mostly not accessible to me in my country. But you are right that these appear to be SIGCOV looking at the titles of the news articles, but it is a shame nobody has improved it since 2009. JMWt (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I also don't have a subscription to Baltimore newspapers. This is neither here nor there for whether the article should be deleted. Hopefully an editor from Baltimore will see this conversation and do it. Simonm223 (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 18:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I see enough independent reviews to support notability. Mccapra (talk) 21:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of rugby union matches between Leicester and Leinster

History of rugby union matches between Leicester and Leinster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There is no real rivalry between these two sides, with no WP:GNG coverage of the rivalry, just a collection of stats with violates WP:NOTSTATS and WP:NLIST. Similar discussions such as this and this have shown a clear consensus on these sorts of articles. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Rugby union, Ireland, and England. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheryl Epple

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

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

The highest-held position is as an elected trustee/board president to Cerritos College. All references are based on death/obituary. Don't think she meets the threshold for WP:NPOL or wp:anybio. Notability is not inherited through marriage. Doesn't make any mention of business accomplishments. Internet search results are sparse. I suggest deletion or move to draft at minimum. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 18:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, Politics, and California. Classicwiki (talk) 18:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lauri Bonacorsi

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

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Sports, and Missouri. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yasmin Siraj

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

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Sports, and Massachusetts. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Garrett MacKeen

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

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mackenzie Bent

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

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Sports, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Care-O-bot

Care-O-bot (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article recreated after deletion discussion ended in delete. Sources have not changed; all available substantial references are press releases. Reconrabbit 18:21, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Technology. Reconrabbit 18:21, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rina Yasutake

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

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

Reviewed during NPP. Combination of wp Notability events and wp:not news. Story of a lady who died and the family kept the body in the house. Two of the three sources were the news reports on it the third says that is is providing the Wikipedia data on the topic. Tagged by others for sources and notability since December. North8000 (talk) 17:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Japan, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Birwahi

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

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

Very small village (popn around 1000) with nothing notable online as far as I can see. Newhaven lad (talk) 17:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Madhya Pradesh. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The nominator's reason is invalid. All populated places are notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Agree population size isn't a valid reason but there doesn't appear to be census data for it. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Travis Mager

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

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

Absolutely fails WP:NSKATE; an earlier PROD had been removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Maryland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries and dependencies by area in 1989

List of countries and dependencies by area in 1989 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non- notable article with no independent notability on it's own from the main countries and dependences by area list article. A very arbitrary article that just picks a certain moment in history. The year before the fall of communism and as it states in the first sentence "This is a list of countries by area in 1989, providing an overview of the world population before the fall of the Iron Curtain."

There could be plenty of articles about some period in time when borders and land area of nations changed. Such as the end of European colonization in Africa, Asia, or even earlier when Spain lost it's former territories in Latin America.

Also there is no source for what makes this notable on it's own and we have something based on original research. All the notes and references listed are the same or if not the same can be or are used in the original article.

I think this also falls under No stats as this is some random information at a random point in time. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nom. This seems to be just an idea somebody had, which is explicitly not what Wikipedia is for. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 19:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is something to look up in the 1989 edition of the World Book, not for a current-day online encyclopedia. Nate • (chatter) 20:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Weird that population is mentioned only in that lead sentence! —Tamfang (talk) 20:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Angeline Gustave

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

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

Poorly sourced footballer BLP. I found a couple of pieces covering her move to France (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), but nothing in-depth. #3 is probably the best source. JTtheOG (talk) 17:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Haiti. JTtheOG (talk) 17:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby League XIII

Rugby League XIII (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Page has a single reference which is an error 404, context is minimal, and the article is missing anything the team actually did, fails WP:GNG Mn1548 (talk) 15:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Rugby league. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Rugby Football League. Not enough content to justify a stand-alone article in its current state, but it's a plausible search term as the team played several fixtures in the previous century against national teams such as Australia and France. J Mo 101 (talk) 17:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faith Presbytery, Bible Presbyterian Church

Faith Presbytery, Bible Presbyterian Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Micro-denomination with perhaps nine churches as of 2014, per a self-published source (citing other self-published sources) that is no longer available online. Citations are exclusively to primary sources, to self-published sources, or to outdated sources of questionable independence and reliability. Participants in the 2022 AfD discussion did not delve deeply into the validity of the sources cited as applied to WP:NORG, which I will do here:

• [1]. Self-published source citing other self-published sources; not updated since 2014.
• [2]. Self-published book; does not illuminate notability of subject, just reference one of its views and its existence.
• [3]. Blog/opinion post; does not meet reliable source criteria for establishing notability.
• [4]. Dead link with no archived version.
• [5]. Book published by Redeeming the Time (RTT) Publications, which is the publishing arm of the subject and thus not independent of the subject.
• [6]. Portuguese-language source; cannot tell if it is self-published. Regardless, it is not significant coverage and merely notes the existence of the subject.
• [7]. OPC General Assembly minutes and thus disqualified as primary source.
• [8]. Personal blog; self-published source.
• [9] Newsletter published by Redeeming the Time (RTT) Publications, which is the publishing arm of the subject and thus not independent of the subject.

I cannot identify any other independent, secondary, reliable sources that verify the notability of this denomination. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:56, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hubert H. Humphrey Fellowship

Hubert H. Humphrey Fellowship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and improve - This is an exchange program through the US State Department. Granted, the article needs work, and needs better sourcing. But this is a very impressive program. It would be a shame to write this off. — Maile (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some valuable links to YouTube info created by the Fellowship program. — Maile (talk) 21:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently working on whe wording and sourcing. — Maile (talk) 23:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Business, Education, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Though the article could benefit from a through revision, the subject itself is notable enough. TH1980 (talk) 03:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malik Siraj Akbar

Malik Siraj Akbar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This BLP, created by a SPA Jarisful (talk · contribs), appears to have been authored by the subject themselves, as he's an experienced editor. This BLP is very promotional in nature, citing unreliable and even unacceptable sources, such as opinion pieces penned by the subject themselves and such pieces are generally not admissible as references. While the subject has garnered some press coverage, but it's too common for journalists to get some sort of press attention on every one of them. To me, this one doesn't appear to meet the criteria outlined in WP:JOURNALIST as well WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Politics, Internet, Pakistan, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oliyum Oliyum

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

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

Undersourced. Tagged for notability for over a decade. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Would seem to be notable [7], but this area of film isn't my expertise. Oaktree b (talk) 15:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Have added References clearly notable Tamil song program was amongst the most popular in Tamil Nadu during the Doordarshan era.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep in view of the reliable sources references added to the article that together show a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dou Kalender

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

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

I stumbled across this article. It wasn't very big, but I made it even smaller as it is unsourced. Originally, the only source was the band's website, but that no longer exists (I've removed it). It's an orphan. The image is on no other language project, including the Turkish one. Although it was created over 10 years ago, only one person has it on their watchlist. That said, I know nothing about band singers, especially foreign ones and have not done WP:BEFORE. If editors think it should be kept, this AfD will hopefully serve to improve the facial notability of the subject and the quality of the article itself. Fails WP:SINGER. Bbb23 (talk) 16:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Turkey. Kpgjhpjm 16:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I won't spend as much time rewriting my comment, because the WP:XFDVOTE tool did not save my comment. Simply put, I couldn't find reliable independent sources on him. There is possible COI as the creator's sole contribution was this biography for more than a decade. The band could be luckier in terms of notability, but it interestingly lacks an article, and after a quick search, I am unsure if there is sufficient coverage out there. I would, however, support redirecting this to an article about the band if it ever gets created during this discussion. Aintabli (talk) 21:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Davis Jr. (presidential candidate)

John Davis Jr. (presidential candidate) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Very minor candidate who appeared on two primary ballots. Received less than 4000 votes out of nearly 20 million cast. Lacking significant, in-depth coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources per WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 15:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Conservatism, Politics, and United States of America. AusLondonder (talk) 15:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete None of the content or sources is substantively biographical. Just some dude who took advantage of easy ballot access. Reywas92^Talk 16:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Colorado. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paolo Tasca (professor)

Paolo Tasca (professor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Previously deleted and salted as Paolo Tasca * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Economics, Computing, Italy, and England. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete Delete -- I don't have access to the deleted versions of the article, but since it has been deleted and salted, the level of improvement to notability needs to be higher than typical to keep, and I don't see a WP:PROF pass here that would warrant it. But UCL is a significant university, so I don't want to be too hasty -- salting seems to me to be primarily based on a "wasting the community's time" basis and not on a "this person couldn't possibly be notable" one. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moving to weak delete by Mikejisuzu's arguments, but nothing warrants speedy keep by a long shot. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 00:33, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Note that he's actually only an associate professor, not a full professor. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep -- Paolo Tasca is much more notable now in 2024, with multiple publications and third-party media references. Right now Tasca has several citations in triple digits. I'd argue that notability itself has increased significantly since the last deletion.

Given the higher requirement for notability, Tasca should have at least one well-cited multiple author work and others in double digits. From a quick look at Google Scholar, he has 6 works in triple-digit citations and more than 20 with double-digit citations. It looks like he has also grown in notability from a media perspective at least regards to reliable sources such as Euronews, and Project Syndicate. [8] As a result, Tasca clearly meets WP:GNG and WP:NPROF notability criteria. Mikejisuzu (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever gave you the idea that that is enough citations in the very highly-cited field of computer science? Phil Bridger (talk) 20:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, for a start the title is a lie, as he's an associate professor, not a professor. Why do people involved with blockchain always seem to lie like this? Exaggeration is a sign of immaturity, not strength. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IC 21

IC 21 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The galaxy has only been featured in databases and large scale surveys which don't provide significant commentary on the object, thus fails WP:NASTCRIT C messier (talk) 15:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Kpgjhpjm 16:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: at that distance I suspect it's probably not going to get a serious study unless it is unusual in some way, and sure enough there are no significant studies on the object, although there are a few web sites. Being an active Seyfert 2 galaxy isn't enough to make it notable. I don't see a list page where it could be redirected. Praemonitus (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zoran Kalabić

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

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

The article is written in a blattantly promo way WP:PROMO. While there are some resources, there is a problem of WP:SNG, since most available resources are very promo-like, and there is no secondary and reliable coverage. After an online research, most available resources lack of independency and are written in a blatant way to promote this person, and most of these resources in a similar way are presented in his website: https://zorankalabic.com/biography/. It should be noted that there is a weird editing history, since the main editor created almost entirely a few months ago both the English and Serbian Wikipedia articles of this person, having a very minimal presence in editing other articles of Serbian people. Lately, the templates with notability issues were removed without any valid explanation, and the photos that are blatantly promo and were initially removed, were restored. Apart from notability issues with lack of reliable and independent resources, there may be a strong problem of WP:COI. Chiserc (talk) 08:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Serbia. Chiserc (talk) 08:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is quite strange request here. Article is not promo, as there is nothing in it to make it like that. Subject is notable and i already explained that i have seen this person on television receiving highest medal of Republic of Serbia after some large donation to the hospital, and wanted to create article as it was incredible for me the person of such importance does not have article on Wikipedia. Some parts of the article were edited and fixed by other editors that actually wanted to contribute instead of this user who only insisted to tag the article and inform others to delete it, without actually working on article. That is normal way of working on article. Notability is without questions no problem at all, many sources are top level independent news agencies of the world so nominator also misrepresented sources quality. Photos were not deleted because they were promo, that is another blatant lie by nominator but because it took some time to confirm original ownership of them by website where i found them. When that was done they were restored as in many other articles. In the end article history shows only good proper editors who are actually trying to make article of this notable person better, and nominations without any proper Wikipedia work which fails good faith guideline, making false accusations about original author of the article. Also, templates with notability issues are not intended to indefinitely tag the articles, but to make explanation that further work is needed. Bit if none is actually trying to fix the article and tags are standing there for weeks without any further comment on talk page or edit, wiki guidelines allow them to be removed. You are not allowed just to restore them and never to point in detail what do you find problematic with this article. I feel that I should protect the article I wanted to create but not because I have COI, i dont, but because this person received highest awards by several countries and donated to many causes, which make it more then valuable and notable addition to Wiki. It baffles me is there anything else behind this request as most of the things article is nominated for are actually misrepresented, also having in mind nominator agenda to delete it for quite some time. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 06:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no significant coverage from reliable sources Good day—RetroCosmos ^talk 19:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  User:RetroCosmos, Most important national public news services of European countries are very much reliable sources. Talking like Radio television of Serbia for example, there isn't anything more important and reliable than that. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 18:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Sources that appear to be should not be acceptable for the purposes of establishing notability Good day—RetroCosmos ^talk 21:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete Initial reaction is Delete. Article is a gushing account of this subject. Definitely MOS:PEACOCK. In conjunction with the simultaneous creation of English and Serbian articles, and a block of photos going up on Commons (lifted straight off subject's own website, with release emailed to VRT by the subject - WP:COI much?), this has the feeling of a PR job. Also the fact that the Wikidata Description was "one of the most successful Serbian businessmen in the diaspora" instead of a more appropriate "Serbian businessman". HOWEVER, this is only a Weak Delete. There might be a case to keep given that there appears to be a legit and (minorly) notable award in the Order of Karađorđe's Star. I'm mindful of WP:Globalise - I would not expect a lot of coverage in English language media and a lack of a profile in the BBC or NYT does not imply a lack of notability! Coverage in Serbian or German would also be acceptable. In that case though, this article needs an end-to-end rewrite to encyclopaedic style (WP:MOS). About 30% of it needs to go, and the rest needs to be backed up by independent cites, not the subject's personal website.Hemmers (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Hemmers is there a way to ask you to change your mind to week keep? I will be more then willing to follow your guidelines and to make article better, but he is really notable in more than a few countries following his donations and support. I find out about him over news following his donation of equipment to children's hospital, and it was incredible to me that such a person does not have Wikipedia article. There isn't anything of those things you mentioned. I was the one who took the photos from website because I found them there, and wanted to make article better as other articles look better with images. There are many important news services publishing about him, including central national ones like Radio Television of Serbia. Would be more then interested in fixing the article, even if it would be smaller, but i cannot understand why would we delete notable subject just because some of the content is not ok. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 18:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  P.S. wikidata description was the first sentence of the article, but that was deleted after other users explained it to me that we cannot use "big words" in articles. I didnt know that, and that's why it was like that. Please assume good faith, i didn't mean anything bad, and its not promotion, i just wanted to create nice article for someone who created many good things for many countries. That is my only motivation. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 18:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The difficulty is that I have searched for sources using google.at, google.rs and google.sr in an attempt to find additional coverage. Each search (for both Zoran Kalabić and Зоран Калабић) returns very few results, at the top of which are these wikipedia articles and the subject's personal website and social media.

  Whilst he does have the Order, this is not itself enough to establish notability. There are lots of people who do a great deal of philanthropic work, appear in local media and even get an MBE (in the UK). But they don't all get an article. WP requires sustained and substantial coverage which I am struggling to see.

  I am open to the idea that there is coverage which has not been indexed by google (because their coverage of non-English material is often flaky, particularly for Cyrillic and other non-Latin scripts), and that is why I am wary of deleting articles for subjects covered by those languages simply because Google does not trivially surface a load of English-language sources. There are undoubtedly many notable Serbs, Kenyans, Indonesians and Malay who are omitted from Wikipedia because native-English speakers are notoriously bad at foreign languages.

  Nonetheless, you need to bring those sources to bear, because I am increasingly unsure that they exist. A mention in RTS is not notable (everyone who receives an MBE is listed in The Times, but that does not automatically earn them an article). Likewise several of the sources are basically press releases or interviews - not substantial independent coverage.Hemmers (talk) 10:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, there are many more sources in Serbian I didn't included in the article, but I will list you here and add an article more if that will help, now I understand it will. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 10:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I don't understand why this article is nominated for deletion. It is quite relevant; this person is a well-known public figure. The article has reliable sources, and it is generally well written; there is no need to delete it. If someone is missing something, they can add or edit it.Bandzimir (talk) 14:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  it is generally well written "generally" is doing quite a bit of heavy lifting there Good day—RetroCosmos ^talk 14:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I tend to agree with Hemmers that the only minor and possible aspect that may imply some notability is the Order of Karađorđe's Star. However, I have checked that these state awards and orders have been given by President of Serbia to many people, and, only during the last very few years, hundreds of institutions and people have taken this or even a higher state order - check the website: https://www.predsednik.rs/predsednik/ukazi-o-odlikovanjima. For this reason, while this award can indeed establish some notability, I see that this one fact cannot validate the notability of WP:ANYBIO for a well-known and significant award or honor, especially if the article continues to be a WP:SOAPBOX. Chiserc (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm sorry but this is again very misleading I don't understand why are you doing this. The list you sent is a general list of all state awards that have been given by president, every single metal and awarded that was given throughout the years. That does not imply that quantity diminished quality, as it is one more lie in this nomination. Only 10 was given for entire year for entire country. So this award recived by this person is by far something important as it is for other countries. Please stop with this anti propaganda. Article is NOT the soap, and you have never pointed anything that is wrong with the article but you just keep repeating and tagging it without any proper explanation this is actually disruptive editing. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 20:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Article should stay since there is sufficient evidence that he is a public figure, but it should be reduced to appropriate size. For example, two photos from ERA events are absolutely not needed. One is more than enough. Parts of some sentences like "and is currently preparing for a doctorate" (Why is this relevant?) and "After a series of successful business years" (What's the evidence?) really make this article look like a PR project. Whoever wrote this should take care of it. But I still think that article should not be deleted. Tresnjevo (talk) 07:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for your productive comments, i will fix and delete all of those great guidelines you pointed out. This means a lot to me to understand editing style, thank you. --Pane.Vino.Wiki (talk) 09:58, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shazza McKenzie

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

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

Declined speedy under G4 again, requiring a third AfD nomination. The second AfD fell foul of this and FWIW it was deleted anyway. And nothing has changed. This fails WP:GNG. The coverage remains trivial and doesn't establish notability. It relies too heavily on Cage Match results which - while reliable - do not establish notability. More sources are needed as before and it appears they don't exist even after I tagged this article in early 2022. As this is the third (possible) deletion I would recommend salting if it does go the same way although sending it into draft mode I would agree to. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:15, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Wrestling, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:05, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep - I have now added several reliable secondary sources to the article, some that are generally reliable (Sydney Morning Herald) and some that are considered industry-specific reliable by Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources (such as Wrestling Observer Newsletter), that help confirm the notability of the subject. CeltBrowne (talk) 08:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Sydney Morning Herald is fine, but I don't see any other sourcing. What's used in the article is match results and I can't find anything that's in a RS. Oaktree b (talk) 15:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Even that source was a decade ago, if they're been no media coverage in the years since, I don't think we have notability either. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Included in the article are a number of recent sources, one being Sports Illustrated, discussing her move from Australia to the United States in March 2023. There are also a number of recently articles such as Hercanberra, Fightful and the now added Pro Wrestling Illustrated, Slam! Wrestling and Sirensports which focus on her specifically.

  
  

  Please keep in mind that sources such as Wrestling Observer Newsletter, POST Wrestling, Slam! Wrestling, Pro Wrestling Illustrated and Fightful are considered reliable industry specific secondary sources by Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources and should be included as part of any count of recent sources. For the specific purposes of an article on professional wrestling, these sources are to be treated the same as, say, a newspaper. CeltBrowne (talk) 05:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't consider them extensive coverage. The Sports Illustrated article is mostly her talking about her move to the US and losing money for half of the article, not the greatest either. Oaktree b (talk) 13:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Analysing sources:Source one [9] doesn't appear to be reliable. The second [10] seems also the same but I am considering the writer who may be an expert. Source three [11] is still unreliable. Source 4 [12] from a reliable source The Sydney Morning Herald was a quite looking like PR post following the underneath writing mentioning her next show. Source five [13] is just a profile and doesn't count up secondary sources. Source six [14] was a quote-like discussion of two other wrestlers which may mention "Shazam". Sources [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25] are all "external links". I don need to stress myself on that. [26] is statistics of Sara Del Rey, though still not from a reliable source. Others seems same and no need to say it lacks verifiability! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The second source, Slam! Wrestling, is a reliable source per Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources.

  Cagematch.net is considered reliable per Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources for match results, which is what it's being used for.

  You don't mention reliable secondary sources such as Sports Illustrated, Pro Wrestling Illustrated, POST Wrestling, Fightful, and Wrestling Observer Newsletter in your analysis. All those publications are considered the highest tier of reliability on Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources.

  I've now added an hour long interview from Talk is Jericho to the article as well as other articles from Fightful. I hope other editors are noting that someone is making good faith efforts to fix the article on short notice. CeltBrowne (talk) 11:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are failing to acknowledge the fact the WP:GNG usurps WP:RS when the mentions are trivial or otherwise against the rules - as the Canberra and Sydney Morning Herald links are per prohibition of promotional links for example. These were both addressed in the previous AfD. Safari Scribe's comments are absolutely on point. Match results are not enough to establish notability - reliable source or not and the others are trivial mentions only. Podcasts can be temperamental as such for the record. Extensive coverage is needed and it's still not there. Again - just because a source is reliable doesn't mean the GNG guideline is passed. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CeltBrowne, Sources are measured by it's content and not because it's a reliable source. At some I stances, we've reliable sources publishing unreliable materials. Look at each's content pls. — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep She has few appearances on NXT,[27][28] Impact/TNA,[29] AEW All Out 2019 (pre-show),[30] and ROH.[31] As a freelancer and indie wrestler, I think her name is recognized in pro wrestling sources; plus considering wrestling for several promotions,[32] her championships and titles,[33] and PWI rankings.[34] --Mann Mann (talk) 06:36, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mann Mann, that doesn't cover appearing in SIGCOV. WP:NEXISTS can be in the future in this case. Could there be option for draftifying? Because I can see that smelling! — Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:34, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You may not be familiar with Pro Wrestling Illustrated or it's Top 500/Top 250 but within WikiProject Professional Wrestling, PWI is considered A) a reliable, secondary source and B) Their Top 500/Top 250 lists are actually considered a very potent source for judging notability. PWI takes its modern Top 250 women list extremely seriously (PWI's annual Top 500 and Top 250 issues are always their best selling issues of the year; their entire business model revolves around it). These lists cover professional wrestlers the entire world over (not just the United States). The higher the listing, the more notable the subject is.

    As Mann Mann linked to, in 2023 (the current most recent edition) PWI listed McKenzie as number 88 on their Top 250. This placement would mean they are classifying her as the 88th most prominent woman in professional wrestling, beating out hundreds of other candidates from across the US, Japan, Mexico, UK, EU, and other wrestling hotbeds.

    Please note, the PWI 500 is not simply a throwaway "list"; it is an entire issue of PWI and most of the those listed will receive at least a blurb explaining who they are and why they have been positioned on the list. CeltBrowne (talk) 12:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Pro Wrestling Illustrated's top list does not provide significant coverage for anyone outside the top ten or even just the number 1 - and even then it's debatable. Your comment is laced with original research and again presumes that WP:RS is enough for notability. It is not. There must be significant coverage or the source fails the WP:GNG test and is therefore not notable. How many times does this need to be said for you to understand this? Addicted4517 (talk) 23:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Per WP:SIGCOV

      • Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.

        McKenzie does not have to be the main topic of the Top 250 list in order for this to count towards SIGCOV, particular as the list in-of-itself is a reference point who is notable within professional wrestling (particularly as other reliable secondary sources give extensive coverage to who makes the Top 500 and Top 250). This in the same sense that no one song is the main topic of Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time, but their inclusion in a list from a reliable secondary source is significant.

        Also while the PWI blurbs can be short, they are not "trivial mentions" in the sense that is outlined in WP:SIGCOV (The Clinton/Three Blind Mice example). The blurbs directly discuss their subjects and outline what they are achieving at the time. Each blurb is directly discussing their subject (as opposed to the Three Blind Mice example in which they are decidedly not the subject of an article about Bill Clinton).

        Pro Wrestling Illustrated's top list does not provide significant coverage for anyone outside the top ten or even just the number 1 - and even then it's debatable

        The 2023 edition of the PWI Top 250 makes clear[35] that PWI has a strict criteria for deciding who is and is not eligible for their list. An entire committee legitimately debates who should be included and where. Each entry on each wrestler outlines what they have achieved in the year and gives an outline of who they are. These are decidedly not the "trivial mentions" outlined in WP:SIGCOV. They are short but succinct explanations of why that person is significant within professional wrestling for that year.

        
        

        This is all besides the fact that in addition to her Top 250 ranking, PWI also gave dedicated coverage to McKenzie in this [36] article, which is included in her Wikipedia article and should be noted towards WP:SIGCOV as well as the other dedicated articles/interviews such as Slam![37], Fightful, Siren Sports, and Talk is Jericho.

        Is it the case that this article would be improved by more examples of dedicated coverage of the subject? Yes

        Is it the case that this article has little or no instances of dedicated coverage? No. It does have several instances of dedicated coverage by reliable secondary sources.

        
        

        I've also now added both a 2017 interview conducted by Bryan Alvarez of Wrestling Observer Newsletter to the article as well as a 2019 interview conducted by Mike Sempervive also of Wrestling Observer Newsletter. Alvarez is notable, the platform is notable and the interviews are significant coverage. CeltBrowne (talk) 02:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

        • I indented your comment properly. Please indent this way in the future as it avoids confusion. Aside from that everything that you said there again seeks to push a reliable source above the GNG and SIGCOV tests. Short - by definition - is trivial. The comparison between a list of wrestlers and a list of songs is completely irrelevant. Dedicated coverage does not equal significant coverage, because dedicated and still be shirt and therefore trivial. The Sempervive interview is on You Tube and I will remove that. You Tube should never be used in a BLP - ever. The Slam wrestling article is in direct violation of WP:SELFPUB (the subject write it herself). Bottom line - a list is not appropriate by itself to prove notability. It may add to it but it can not be relied upon. Addicted4517 (talk) 04:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

          You Tube should never be used in a BLP - ever.

          Please show me a guideline which states this. WP:Youtube and Wikipedia:Video links make clear that Youtube as a platform is not a problem in-of-itself; Youtube videos may be cited as long as they're from a verifiable, reliable, secondary source. Inauguration of Donald Trump, for example, cites several youtube videos attributed to reliable secondary sources such as PBS and CNN. Belle Delphine, a good-rated BLP article, has an entire subsection in its references dedicated to youtube citations.

          The Slam wrestling article is in direct violation of WP:SELFPUB (the subject write it herself). .

          It's not SelfPub. Selfpub is when John Smith writes something for JohnSmith.blog, a website Smith control and runs themself. Slam! Wrestling is an Independent reliable secondary source per Wikipedia:PW/RS which McKenzie was asked to write a guest feature for. It's a primary source which can be used to make WP:ABOUTSELF statements, which is what it was used for.

          a list is not appropriate by itself to prove notability

          No one is arguing it is on it's own. It's to be taken together with all the other sources being provided, obviously. CeltBrowne (talk) 05:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centre for India & Global Business

Centre for India & Global Business (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

nn. No independent sources - Altenmann >talk 15:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Education, India, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 14:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Progress Ridge Town Square

Progress Ridge Town Square (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. A "lifestyle center"/ small mall with 30 stores. Of the two references, one is a database type listing and the other is about a nearby trail and does not even mention it. North8000 (talk) 14:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:15, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First Battle of Lahore (1759)

First Battle of Lahore (1759) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

An editor has performed a search and found that sufficient sources exist to establish the subject's notability. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.Find sources: "XfD today" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The sources provided on the page show no mention for a battle in "August 1759", the sources only show that Ahmad Shah even began his campaign in September 1759, reaching Lahore and then taking it in November. [38] Noorullah (talk) 10:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 12:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless proper sourcing is found. The sourcing on Urdu wiki isn’t any help. Mccapra (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Sigh, not another one of these. We might have to look into the others at Battle of Lahore (disambiguation), too. -- asilvering (talk) 16:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:HEY.

1. "Sabaji maintained his position with great valour and strength, inflicted a crushing defeat upon Jahan Khan, who was severely wounded and lost his son in the action. Jahan Khan’s return to Peshawar in discomfiture so roused the fury of the Shah." Excerpts from New history of the Marathas vol 1. p-408
2. "Dattaji Sindhia progressed slowly through Malwa. He appointed Sabaji Sindhia to occupy Lahore ( March, 1759 ). The Sikhs did not check the Marathas, but co-operated with them in driving away the Afghans under Jahan Khan across the Indus. Sabaji’s forces penetrated as far as Peshawar." Excerpts from A Study Of Eighteenth Century India Vol. 1. p-342

• Additional comments- Renaming the article to the Capture of Lahore or even the Maratha occupation of Lahore (per sources) would be better. Though these sources are enough for keeping this article still additional sources would be appreciated.

Sudsahab (talk) 10:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't even seem to be a battle at all.

Per Sarkar, it states that the Afghans had evacuated Lahore, meaning that there was no "battle" for the city in April 1758. [39] Also corroborated by Hari Ram Gupta: [40]

The Afghans returned in October 1759 and re-occupied Lahore. [41]

There's no mention of a battle in August 1759 whatsoever.

Jahan Khan's battle per this source: [42] Doesn't seem to be mentioned at Lahore at all, nor do the sources you've shown imply this, but rather is "Thereafter the invaders overran Attock, then crossed the Indus, and threatened the historic fort of Rohtas on the left bank of the Jhelum. By that time, Sabaji Patel (Schinde) reached the place with fresh troops and a large number of Sikh fighters, who had made common cause with him against the Afghan infiltrators. The Afghans were defeated by the combined forces of the Marathas and the Sikhs in a pitched battle, in which Jahan Khan lost his son and was himself also wounded."

So again, this shows this was not a battle at Lahore. Noorullah (talk) 14:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[43] Does not show a battle at Lahore, but mentions Jahan Khan's defeat at an undisclosed location, and only later talks about how Ahmad Shah re-occupied Lahore (presumably in his 1759 October campaign). Noorullah (talk) 14:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I proposed renaming this article, either it should be Jahan Khan invasion of Rohtas or Battle of Rohtas. Coming to Sarkar's reliability which is questionable. Also see WP:RAJ, we can't rely on him as long as we have better sources for the notability of the Battle of Lahore (Battle of Rohtas?).

You do realise [this|https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.98175/page/n361/mode/2up] work of Hari Ram Gupta (published in 1944) is relatively older than his cited work in the article Marathas and Panipat. (published in 1961)? It would be obvious that older sources might not contain more information around this certain event, this is WP:AGE MATTERS.

• In Marathas and Panipat. p-101 tells us: Jahan Khan rushed to Peshawar, captured Attock, and then advanced towards Rohtas. Sabaji sought help from the Sikhs. The united forces marched against Jahan Khan, whom they encountered on the other side of the Jehlam. In a fierce engagement the Afghan general suffered heavily. He lost his son and a large number of troops, himself receiving several wounds
• [44] p-260, It also propounds: Thereafter, the invaders overran Attock, then crossed the Indus and threatened the historic fort of Rohtas on the left bank of the Jhelum. By that time, Sabaji Patel reached the place with fresh troops and a large number of the Sikh fighters, who had made a common cause with him against the Afghan infiltrators. The Afghans were defeated by the combined forces of the Marathas and the Sikhs in a pitched battle, in which Jahan Khan lost his son and was himself also wounded. Note Rohtas,Pitched battle and fierce engagement in both of the quotations.

Sudsahab (talk) 04:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But why have a separate article for this at all? It doesn't seem that the sources are discussing it in that way. They're describing it as part of an overall campaign. That tells me the best place for this information is somewhere like Northern Campaign of Raghunath Rao, or whichever other article might fit better. -- asilvering (talk) 00:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have already quoted the sources which discussed it thoroughly. And no it's not part of Northern Campaign of Raghunath Rao, not to be confused with Capture of Lahore which occurred in 1758 by Raghunath Rao. If merging is an option then I'd suggest merging it to Afghan-Maratha War. But my vote is still keep until someone gives more inputs. Sudsahab (talk) 14:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sudsahab, if it isn't part of Northern Campaign of Raghunath Rao, you should fix the infobox, since that's what it says. -- asilvering (talk) 00:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright Sudsahab (talk) 08:02, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:HEY and to allow further discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pala Tibetan War

Pala Tibetan War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

• To begin with, there are no reliable sources that mention a war between the Pala dynasty of Bengal and the Tibetans. Neither has any historian referred to it as the "Pala Tibetan War" nor have they mentioned such a conflict in any way.
• The background section of the article fails to address the relationship between the Palas and Tibetans. Additionally, the WP:SYNTH has been consistently disregarded throughout the entire article, including the background section. Moreover, sources have been presented suggesting the submission of the Pala ruler to the Tibetans, but there is also a source provided that contradicts this claim.
• The section "Dharmapala's Conflict with Tibetans" doesn't actually discuss the conflict between the Palas and Tibetans; rather, it focuses on Dharmapala's victory against the Nepalese forces. This marks the first instance of major synthesis of sources in the article. The background section deliberately states that Nepal was under Tibetan suzerainty. Therefore, the editor synthesized that the conflict between Nepal and the Palas was distorted into the "Pala Tibetan War," which is nonsensical as it combines two distinct contexts. For instance, if one source states that "X is a vassal of Y," and another source mentions that an entity called "Z successfully campaigns against X", an original research is conducted, leading to the conclusion that "Z defeated Y", despite Y's lack of involvement.
• The pattern continues in the section "Devapala's Conflict with Tibetans," where synthesis of sources occurs, often with poorly sourced content, including reliance on primary records. Similar to Dharmapala, Devapala is depicted as engaging in a war with the Nepalese, which is then distorted into a conflict with the Tibetans. The article contains sparse and scattered information, especially if we disregard the synthesis part, where the context is barely mentioned in the sources and consists of scattered lines, primarily based on Pala dynasty's primary records. Moreover, none of the Tibetan or Chinese records mention any conflict between the Tibetans and the Pala dynasty. Fails WP:GNG, and the article is completely built on WP:OR, including the title. Imperial^[AFCND] 07:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Imperial^[AFCND] 07:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Imperial^[AFCND] 07:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• You have misunderstood the article. There are reliable and contemporary sources that point to a conflict between the Palas and Tibetans. Tibetan records specifically mention a war with the Pala Empire. The Pala records also mention conflicts with Tibetans. Furthermore, Dharmapāla's contemporaneous records indicate that he seized the throne of Nepal from the Tibetan Empire. Even the Nepali tradition states that Dharmapāla had subjugated Nepal. The conflict between Dharmapāla and Tibetans is supported by Devapāla's inscriptions.
• The same sources mention the submission of Palas and exaggeration of Tibetans. The sources cited, which state that the Pala Empire was subjugated by the Tibetans, tells that Tibetan claims are exaggerated as they lack proof, so there is no contradiction with WP:SYNTH.
• Still, it is incongruent with the Tibetans as the Palas conquered Nepal from the Tibetan Empire. However, if this is the sole flaw in the article, it can be resolved by altering the title to 'Pala-Nepalese conflict'. Thus, I request that instead of discarding the article, the title be changed to 'Pala-Nepalese war'.

Based Kashmiri (talk) 09:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend reading WP:SYNTH. "Contradiction with WP:SYNTH"? Coming to first point, none of the sources cited here, directs to a Tibetan source, and even lacks scattered lines in 21st century, from both sides. Seizing the throne from Nepal neither mentioned in the article. However, even if it is present in WP:RS, that gives noone the right display that as "Pala Tibetan War". The second point doesn't make any sense to me. The third point actually points out how the article entirely fails. It cannot be changed as "Pala–Nepalese War", as the attempt to show Tibetians as belligerents have failed here. I am sorry, but WP:MILHIST articles doesn't suit for you as two of such articles created by you, this and Draft:Pala invasion of Sindh, both are miserably made upon original research. Now, the suggestion to move it to "Pala–Nepalese War", I would oppose it because it too fails WP:GNG, with some scattered lines mentioned in some sources. As it is already covered in the article of Dharmapala and Devapala, there is no need for a seperate article. Imperial^[AFCND] 09:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed some issues in the article, but I still request for the article to be moved into the draft space instead of deleting it. Allow time and space for its improvement until it is ready for main space. Based Kashmiri (talk) 14:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Nepal and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Seems like what the article is saying is:

1. Dharampala of Pala dynasty may have conquered Nepal.
2. But Nepal was likely under Tibet's control around that time.
3. So, there must have been a war that won the Palas Nepal from the Tibetans.

I am seeing too many ifs, buts and maybes. But is that what the article is saying? If so, exactly which of those premises are we reasonably sure of? Does the conclusion follow? And isn't the conclusion too weak anyway to present at "Pala-Tibet war" as though it were fact? Looks to me like the author is conjecturing the existence of a war based on circumstantial evidence. That's no way to write a Wikipedia article. There are other ways to gain territory. If you have a big enough force, you may walk in unopposed. The previous occupying force may have withdrawn before the next conquerors got there. There may have been dialogue and treaty to cede control in exchange of something else. Assuming, Nepal was even under Tibetan control, and assuming Nepal was even conquered by the Palas. Please tell me we are basing our article on better evidence than that, ideally providing freely accessible sources to support your argument. Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rox De Luca

Rox De Luca (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Regrettably, I'm not seeing evidence that the subject passes WP:GNG/WP:NARTIST. I hope to be proved wrong! IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 10:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Arts, Visual arts, Italy, and Australia. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 10:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, there seem to be enough reputable sources on the page for notability. Will watch this discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, please let me know what is missing to make notability.louibu (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, considerable work has been done on this page since the AfD was posted. Can the discussion be closed and the notice removed? Louibu (talk) 06:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm still not seeing evidence that the subject passes WP:NARTIST, so I won't be withdrawing the nomination. In particular, in my reading, the presented sources don't seem enough to constitute significant critical attention, nor is the subject's work represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums, which seem the two easiest criteria for the subject to pass. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 08:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The discussion will run at least seven days. There is no reason present for a speedy close in either direction. Star Mississippi 13:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.roxdeluca.com/images/Gleaning_for_plastics_defying_wastefulness_by_Paul_Allatson_2020_.pdf		This is a reupload on the subject's website of a blogspot article (WP:SELFPUBLISH).	See WP:SELFPUBLISH.	✘ No
https://www.roxdeluca.com/index.php/artist-cv-curriculum-de-arte	This is the artist's CV.	See WP:ABOUTSELF.	See WP:ABOUTSELF.	✘ No
https://theculturetrip.com/pacific/australia/articles/sea-of-plastic-an-artists-quest-to-address-ocean-pollution			This is a travel guide website that ran an article on the artist.	✔ Yes
https://searchthecollection.nga.gov.au/object?keyword=anna%20de%20luca&searchIn=artistOrCulture&searchIn=title&searchIn=medium&uniqueId=127158			Doesn't mention the subject; this is just the link to a painting by the subject's mother.	✘ No
https://gunyah.blogspot.com/search?q=rox+de+luca	This is a residency report from the subject itself on a blog.	See WP:ABOUTSELF.	See WP:ABOUTSELF.	✘ No
https://www.artshub.com.au/news/features/artists-giving-materials-a-new-life-2512531/			~ This is a fairly short mention; the subject is not the main focus of the article, but is quoted, with some commentary on their work.	~ Partial
Millner, Jacqueline; Moore, Catriona (2022). Contemporary art and feminism. New York: Routledge. p. 193.			Offline source, accepting in good faith: according to the block quotation, this is a paragraph mention in the book.	✔ Yes
Brennan, Anne (1 December 1997). "Beyond reason: Jo Darbyshire and Rox De Luca". Eyeline. 35: 22–24.			Offline source, accepting in good faith, though the title suggests this may be an interview.	✔ Yes
https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/45398/2/The%20Transcultural%20Edge.pdf			A paragraph mention on the subject and their work.	✔ Yes
Allatson, Paul (1996). "Men and Mettle". Artlink. 16 (1): 24–26.			Offline source, accepting in good faith.	✔ Yes
https://www.gq.com.au/style/trends/the-style-download-15324/image-gallery/a1114634ed7db996d49f80ed40e73536			Very short mention of the subject and one of their works.	✔ Yes
https://www.projectvortex.org/	This is a project with which the artist is associated.		Name doesn't even feature in the source.	✘ No
https://www.artshub.com.au/news/reviews/review-deakin-university-contemporary-small-sculpture-award-2018-256473-2360787/			Very short, one-sentence mention of the subject and one of their works, which to me constitutes a trivial mention.	✘ No
https://www.unsw.edu.au/news/2017/07/the-inaugural-ravenswood-australian-womens-art-prize--finalists			Just the subject's name is mentioned.	✘ No
https://www.artshub.com.au/news/sponsored-content/turning-waste-into-art-is-a-community-affair-261135-2368551/			Just the subject's name is mentioned.	✘ No
https://www.woollahragallery.com.au/Artists/Artist-in-Residence/Rox-de-Luca	This is her biography as an artist-in-residence, almost certainly written by the subject.		See WP:ABOUTSELF.	✘ No
https://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/2192259/deakin_university_art_collection_artists.pdf			Just the subject's name is mentioned.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using ((source assess table)).

Your mileage may vary, but to me, these sources, assessed together, do not demonstrate that WP:GNG is met. In particular, we have only one "chunky" piece that focuses on the artist, while the rest are either borderline trivial mentions or the artist and their work are discussed, in no more than a paragraph, as a subtopic. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 10:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, the source analysis shows that sufficient sources have been obtained to reach GNG. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patricio Vidal (Chilean footballer)

Patricio Vidal (Chilean footballer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I can't find any mention of this guy anywhere. He seems to have been a bit player on the teams he played. WP:GNG fails. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless the resident expert on Chilean football, @ImSnot, knows of any sources, any accomplishments, anytihng useful. Geschichte (talk) 15:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Chile. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do You Like Horny Bunnies?

Do You Like Horny Bunnies? (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

fails general notability guideline. ltbdl (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ltbdl (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Passes GNG with two sources; they might be hard copy, but they help the article pass, and there are surely digital sources out there easily. Nate • (chatter) 17:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Buddy Story

A Buddy Story (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Found zero evidence of notability myself. Mushy Yank added a Variety article which mentions the film, but only very briefly, so I don't take it for much. And even then, if that's all there is then I don't see why this should've been dePRODded in the first place. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 13:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 13:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I deproDed the page because... the film might be notable (see my edit summary; and deletion did not seem uncontroversial). This is a released film with a notable cast, including a very notable actress (and, before anyone adds a link in caps to a WP essay, no, notability is not inherited but a notable cast contributes to a film's potential notability). The production received coverage (https://www.jpost.com/jewish-world/jewish-news/filmmaker-marries-hollywood-to-tikkun-olam#google_vignette; https://www.mtv.com/news/jic2e3/elisabeth-moss-a-buddy-story-trailer; https://www.slashfilm.com/520699/a-buddy-story-trailer-elizabeth-moss/) but they're not reviews. Is it significant enough? I don't know. But a PROD does not allow discussion, does it? Is there more? Maybe. This AfD might be the place to present other sources (NB- I've added a few tiny things, including the sources linked here). Is there an ATD? Maybe. Same answer. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bosaso FC

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

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

Since, per WP:NTEAM, teams and clubs have to demonstrate WP:GNG for a standalone article, then this fails WP:GNG as there's nothing to establish notability. Pieces from Hoorse Media ([45], [46]) can not be considered independent as they sponsor the club. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Football, and Somalia. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It does seem slightly odd to discount sources from what appears to be a reliable media source for the region because they support the club given the region, but there's other sources out there which can be used to improve the article such as [47] and mentions in [48] and [49]. Another problem here is most of this part of the world happens on Facebook. SportingFlyer T·C 23:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Bosaso FC is an existing local sports club in Somalia with sponsorship of Horseed Media Group. Page deserves not to delate as editor from Somalia club is existing Muscab30 (talk) 23:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let me recommend we should not delete this page. Club is an existing local sport club in Somalia. Muscab30 (talk) 23:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep There are reliable sources here, as sponsorships don't detract from journalistic independence. Indeed, sponsorship adds to the team's notability. The team is simply not mainstream or well covered. This feels like a further example of unconscious WP:BIAS discounting teams, players, etc. from places like Somalia. Anwegmann (talk) 00:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Strong keep as per discussion the source of the reference used other reliable sources from different pages. Muscab30 (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, the football club exists, but the only (single) news source about the club is by the news outlet that sponsors the club. WP:GNG needs multiple, independent reliable sources that are more than just passing mentions (source 4 doesn't mention the club at all). Sionk (talk) 00:11, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Redirect is not the only single news source there is different source used check the page or are related and are original language is Somali language since the team is in SOMALIA Muscab30 (talk) 15:22, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Answer for the sorce 4 the source four is related tgis topic is about Puntland the state responsible the team area is the federal member state of Somalia responsible managing snd regulating football in the area of Bosaso FC. Bosaso FC operates under Puntland. Muscab30 (talk) 15:26, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That is incorrect - source 4 clearly states Bosaso FC is owned by Bosaso City- the commercial town of Puntland in Bari region. There's enough here for a stand-alone article. SportingFlyer T·C 18:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of football clubs in Somalia per nom. Fails GNG due to limited independent SIGCOV. Frank Anchor 04:06, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 13:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect as above. GiantSnowman 13:47, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: : Sorry, after checking the good sources, it may be eligible for deletion or redirectionGQO (talk) 9:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to List of football clubs in Somalia per WP:ATD. Fails WP:SIGCOV as the news coverage is from a media outlet that sponsors the club, which clearly makes the coverage not independent.4meter4 (talk) 17:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. A source analysis (it need not be formal) would be helpful. Also, User:Muscab30, please strike one of your bolded "votes" as I'm not sure which one reflects your current opinion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• There are four sources in the article - one from the UN, which isn't great; one from Puntlandes, which is coverage of the league, but also includes a few sentences specifically on the club which can be used to expand the article, and is similar the type of coverage I look for when creating articles on clubs; a DW article which doesn't specifically mention the club; and a cable TV interview on Youtube, which would generally be considered unreliable but is clearly a cable TV network putting up one of their broadcasts. In the AfD, there are two good articles from the newspaper which sponsors the team which don't appear to be promotional in any way; a Warsom article about a friendly Bosaso played in that the president of Puntland attended, which is excellent coverage; a reference in a scholarly article which can be used in the article to describe who owns the team, but is not GNG-qualifying; and a fixture list for the league which features an alternate spelling of the team. Between the sponsoring newspaper, the Puntlandes article, and the Warsom article, it's a pass in my opinion, but if we're going to be strict and say that the sponsoring newspaper doesn't count, it becomes more marginal. As I've already noted, most of the media coverage for Puntland actually happens on Facebook, so if we're going to go letter of the law GNG it's more likely to be redirected, but if we go spirit of GNG and say that we need reliable sources which show that the club has been written about by secondary sources, it's a keep. I'm still strongly advocating for this to be kept. SportingFlyer T·C 00:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Note: most of news in Somalia are in Facebook so it's very limited to find websites written about such areas, so I believe it's unfair to mark this article "deletion" dealing contextual argument will improve diverse approach of dealing such situations. The only thing that you believed in horseedmedia media is the sponsor of the this club and can't be referred to source, first Horseed Media is well-known and respected Media station in Somalia with reliable information in Somalia context, secondly, we used other source to follow your directives and rules mentioned above as editor, contributor and creator of this article I believe it's completely appropriate rules and regulations of Wikipedia and should be accepted. Muscab30 (talk) 23:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Longer note below, it broke the template
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 13:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing admin note, I had closed this as The result was redirect‎ to List of football clubs in Somalia as a viable ATD. Consensus is sourcing is of insufficient independence. This isn't as close as it looks with a keep noting the team is neither mainstream nor well covered, which negates the !vote which I still believe to be a correct read. @SportingFlyer: raised some good points at my Talk about the points they'd raised above and I offered to relist in lieu of DRV. Star Mississippi 13:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Representative of the UNHCR and WFP, London

Representative of the UNHCR and WFP, London (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Contested PROD of an individual office of the UNHCR. Completely fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. Zero secondary sources, only source is government listing of diplomatic missions. AusLondonder (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Organizations, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge or redirect. Repeating the reason I gave for deprodding this: "This should be (merged and) redirected somewhere. Possibly List of diplomatic missions in the United Kingdom#International organisations but a page about the UNHCR/WFP representatives would be better if there is one". Thryduulf (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't agree there's anything particularly useful to merge. I really doubt many readers already on Wikipedia are going to be searching "Representative of the UNHCR and WFP, London" to get to a list of diplomatic missions in London. AusLondonder (talk) 13:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  They won't be using this title to find a list of diplomatic missions in London, but they will be using this title to find the content we have about this topic that is located at the list page. Thryduulf (talk) 13:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  A redirect is effectively from a search term, other than incoming links (which mostly seem to be from the diplomatic missions in London template). I'm questioning who will be using such a specific, lengthy search term. I think it's a very implausible search term. If they forget to add WFP when searching, they'll get nowhere but if they include WFP there's a redirect? That's so arbitrary and unnecessary. Keep in mind that prior to the PROD and AfD, the page was struggling to get a single view a day. AusLondonder (talk) 14:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Office of the World Bank, London

Office of the World Bank, London (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Contested PROD of an individual office of the World Bank. No other office has its own page. Clearly fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 13:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Organizations, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 13:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge or redirect which is what I said should happen when I deprodded this. I'm just not certain what the best target is. Thryduulf (talk) 13:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If the proposer of a merge or redirect cannot identify a target, that's a rather significant problem. You deprodded the article but failed to suggest a credible alternative to deletion. In that case, the article should be deleted. AusLondonder (talk) 13:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bandhan Mutual Fund

Bandhan Mutual Fund (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Trivial coverage according to WP:ORGTRIV. Citations are collections of paid news which are highly pervasive and deeply integrated practice within Indian news media WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The primary issue arises from the editor's attempt to pass off two financial products (exchange traded funds), namely BANDHAN S&P BSE SENSEX ETF (BSE:540154) and BANDHAN NIFTY 50 ETF (NSE:IDFNIFTYYET), as company's own stock market listings, which they are not, thereby failing to adhere to WP:LISTED. A comparable effort was observed in the AFD discussion of Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance, wherein the company tried to be part of NIFTY 50 without proper validation. In a nutshell, the company falls short when it comes to meeting WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND. To put it mildly, they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a banjo and their depth is about as shallow as a puddle in the Sahara. TCBT1CSI (talk) 12:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India. TCBT1CSI (talk) 12:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Williams (rugby union, born 1970)

Steve Williams (rugby union, born 1970) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not finding enough here to meet WP:NSPORT or WP:GNG, coverage seems to only be routine match announcements. Primefac (talk) 12:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Sports, Rugby union, and Wales. Primefac (talk) 12:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A 28-match international career usually brings coverage, and there is sourcing in this, this and others. With the majority of his career played when online sourcing was limited, it's likely there will be more offline. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dyras

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

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

No evidence of notability, nothing pops up in a WP:BEFORE in English and German. Broc (talk) 12:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Germany, and Poland. Broc (talk) 12:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]