Wikipedia:XfD today

Shortcuts

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.

Speedy deletion candidates[edit]

Articles[edit]

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< May 16	May 18 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Mehboob Aapke Qadmon Main[edit]

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

I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage and announcements/press release based coverage like this and this, and pieces by freelancers in RS like this all of which isn't sufficient to establish GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinky Ka Dulha[edit]

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

I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage like this and this which isn't sufficient to establish GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Altair4 Multimedia[edit]

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

It doesn't appear to be a notable company. I searched for sources using all alternatives: "Altair4 Multimedia," "Altair 4 Multimedia," and "Altair Multimedia," but couldn't find anything that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH. GSS ^💬 15:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Italy. GSS ^💬 15:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zurab Gurielidze[edit]

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

Can't find any passable source for WP:ANYBIO. Subject also doesn't pass WP:NPROF inherently. It's also lacking in terms of WP:GNG. Also, can't find good figures in directories like Google Scholar. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asset revesting[edit]

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

This buzzword soup appears to be sourced entirely to the book that invented the term (WP:NOTNEO) and the blog posts and press releases of the author promoting it (WP:SPIP, WP:NOTPROMO). I am unable to find any reliable sources using the term, much less anything meeting the other three criteria. I'm not quite sure the tone is G11, so here we are. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robert P. Watson[edit]

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

The only real claim to fame in the article is a "former candidate for the United States House of Representatives" and an academic. The information for the candidate for the House of Representatives specifically states he was considering running and formed an exploratory committee. This does not meet the requirements for notability. The article was created in 2005 so there has been plenty of opportunities to add reliable sourced content if it existed, but from what I can see it doesn't exist. This individual does not meet the requirements for notability to have a stand alone Wikipedia article. VViking_TalkEdits 15:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost Friday Media[edit]

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

Subject fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. The only reference I can find that is significant coverage in an independent, reliable, secondary source is this (note 3, and it's an edge case for notability since it seems to come from VinePair's WP:TRADES coverage.). All other sources in this article, as well as WP:BEFORE sources offering significant coverage, are press releases or sponsored content once you click through, even the Yahoo Finance pieces. Other references on this page are to LinkedIn, the subject's own website or other primary/user-generated sources. One item of significant coverage in an independent, secondary, reliable source is not enough; we need multiple. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eissporthalle Iserlohn[edit]

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

No refs on the page for many years. Nothing to add from the article on de.wiki. not seeing much else which could be considered against the inclusion criteria JMWt (talk) 14:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ice hockey and Germany. JMWt (talk) 14:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wael William Diab[edit]

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

BLP with no evidence of notability. Existing references are to:

1/3/7: primary source bios
2: a list of WP:PATENTS, which does not contribute to notability.
4: a press release
5/8/9: WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS in non-independent sources
6: self-authored material

WP:BEFORE search does not turn up any significant coverage in reliable, secondary, independent sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Technology, California, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zaira Meneses[edit]

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

This article does not meet the notability guidelines outlined in WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It was accepted through AfC by an inexperienced user. The reference to The New York Times is merely a passing mention and is behind a paywall. Hitro talk 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Women, and Mexico. Hitro talk 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helmuth Ehrhardt[edit]

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

No refs on the page for many years. It is difficult to WP:V the information currently on the page or whether this is the same person that several sources name as involved directly in Nazi crimes. Currently my thought is that this page should be WP:TNT until someone can do a better job of it, but I would be interested if others can find good sources to offer against the WP:GNG JMWt (talk) 12:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Psychiatry and Germany. JMWt (talk) 12:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akish[edit]

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

Notability doubtful. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 10:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 10:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latter Day Saints-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:18, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this was PRODded in 2008 and then not sent here for some reason. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 03:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jupither[edit]

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

Band fails WP:GNG, WP:NBAND, WP:NMUSIC. No WP:SIGCOV in reliable and independent sources. Sources cited in article are (1) primarily about the lead singer, incidentally referencing the subject; (2) AllMusic which is of disputed reliability (and in any event is a single paragraph); and (3) a primary source. WP:BEFORE search turns up nothing else to support notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 12:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Philadelphia Union broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to the most ardent fans. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. As with sources per WP:RS, these consists of WP:PRIMARY and dead links, the only decent source is an announcment for a new announcer; not helping this list to assert notability. SpacedFarmer (talk) 10:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Football, Lists, and Pennsylvania. SpacedFarmer (talk) 10:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of New England Revolution broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to the most ardent fans. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. As with sources per WP:RS, only consist of a single one about the 2023 season; not helping this list to assert notability. SpacedFarmer (talk) 10:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Football, Lists, and Massachusetts. SpacedFarmer (talk) 10:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sagem myX-2[edit]

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

It doesn't appear to meet WP:N, made by non-notable company. Boleyn (talk) 09:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Provincial Institute of Teacher Education Nawabshah[edit]

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

Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Schools. Shellwood (talk) 10:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maternity And Child Health Care Institute Benazirabad[edit]

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

Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benazir Bhutto Shaheed University of Technology and Skill Development[edit]

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

Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Schools. Shellwood (talk) 10:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bilawal Stadium[edit]

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

Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Cricket. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taluka Hospital Sakrand[edit]

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

Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bahria Town Nawabshah[edit]

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

Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear Medicine Oncology & Radiotherapy Institute Nawabshah[edit]

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

Lacks sig/in-depth coverage so, fails WP:GNG. I don't see it passing WP:ORG either. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ed Forest[edit]

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

No refs on the page for many years. I'm not seeing refs to consider but perhaps they exist in languages I can't read. JMWt (talk) 09:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Norway and Sweden. JMWt (talk) 09:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment and Geography. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Data-driven astronomy[edit]

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

This appears to be either or both a PhD project proposal (or a MA or Part II). It describes what will be done as part of an apparently funded proposal. Since there already is a more general page on the wider topic at Astroinformatics, I see no rationale for this page. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Astronomy and Computing. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akshay Bam[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Another case of a politician who got involved in the upcoming election and withdrew or defected to another party and stuff like that. Sources are mostly WP:ROUTINE and WP:RUNOFTHEMILL, some are unreliable. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician and entrepreneur is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 11:25, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Again another article created solely for the general election which fails of WP:BLP1E. It also fails WP:NPOL, as he was never elected as an MLA or MP, nor does he meet WP:GNG because the sources are not significant. These sources cannot establish notability. GrabUp - Talk 12:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Madhya Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:25, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

East African School of Media Studies[edit]

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

No refs on the page for many years. Not seeing sources to WP:V basic details, whether it is a degree awarding institution etc. Possibly sources exist that I'm not seeing but currently per WP:V claims can be removed. JMWt (talk) 08:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Kenya. JMWt (talk) 08:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Earthsearch Mindwarp[edit]

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

No refs on the page for many years. I'm not seeing any RS to consider against the inclusion criteria - not all BBC radio dramas are notable. WP:NOTEVERYTHING WP:NOTPLOT JMWt (talk) 08:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and United Kingdom. JMWt (talk) 08:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge a very condensed version to author James Follett#Radio and redirect as WP:Alternative to deletion. Daranios (talk) 11:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to James Follett#Radio, nothing to merge since the article is unreferenced. --Mika1h (talk) 11:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eagles Postgame Live[edit]

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

No refs on the page for many years and I'm not seeing much that could be considered substantial RS to consider against the inclusion criteria. Possibly as an ATD could merge to NBC Sports Philadelphia JMWt (talk) 08:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Pennsylvania. JMWt (talk) 08:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. No WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources. Cbl62 (talk) 08:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to NBC Sports Philadelphia#Sports coverage: it is mentioned there, making it a valid-enough alternative to deletion, but there's really nothing to merge (especially since this has been tagged as completely unsourced since 2009). The program itself is a run-of-the-mill postgame show that would not really be expected to merit its own significant coverage. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haplotype 35[edit]

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

Unsourced since 2011, notability unclear. jengod (talk) 06:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. jengod (talk) 06:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added a reference. Most articles about individual haplotypes deal with a name that begins with a letter rather than a digit, so this might not be the current terminology. I wonder whether this should be merged into Haplogroup R1b. Haplogroup 21 is a redirect to Haplogroup E-M215, for example. I will post a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular Biology/Genetics asking for expert help. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leverx[edit]

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

Unfortunately, aside from the usual announcements and sponsored articles (excluded under WP:ORGTRIV and ORGIND respectively), I was unable to find any relevant coverage. The topic may be more suitable in a more comprehensive publication or database. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and Florida. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable subject for wikipedia --Improvised but so real unicorn (talk) 11:47, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

wrong page vote, was not planned for here --Improvised but so real unicorn (talk) 15:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article about a consultancy operating in SAP integration, etc. The given references are announcement-based; as the nominator indicates, these fall short of WP:CORPDEPTH. searches are not finding evidence of attained notability for Leverx or Emerline. AllyD (talk) 08:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KUAM-LP[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG; no sources; could merge with KUAM-TV. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 14:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 14:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Sparrow Simpson[edit]

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

Nothing in the article suggests notability. TheLongTone (talk) 14:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He was a fairly prolific author, and did a lot to improve the library at St Paul's Cathedral. Anna795bc (talk) 14:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GT Racer[edit]

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

Source is entirely unsourced, does not assert notability other than being broadcasted on a cable channel and thus fails WP:GNG SpacedFarmer (talk) 12:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Motorsport, Transportation, and United Kingdom. SpacedFarmer (talk) 12:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KZTC-LD[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 10:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 10:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KSDY-LD[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 10:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 10:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Hajizade[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Delete: Article is well written, however, feels like PROD--Correspondentman (talk) 06:36, 17 May 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 May 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Azerbaijan. Shellwood (talk) 11:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Journalism, and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jolly Mazimhaka[edit]

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

Only links to one article being her husband. Searching in google news, google scholar and JSTOR yields very little. Fails WP:BIO, WP:AUTHOR, WP:ACADEMIC. LibStar (talk) 06:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Rwanda. LibStar (talk) 06:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No pass of WP:Prof or WP:GNG. See WP:NOTINHERITED. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete Subject not notable neither does it passes WP:GNG.--Meligirl5 (talk) 10:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bamidele Onalaja[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Not enough sources to establish GNG here. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- I found the source below

[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. I'm of the opinion that some articles doesn't need to go through AFD instead a notability tag should be placed for it to be improved on if the editor placing it , isn't ready to find source.Otbest (talk) 07:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now let me help you take a look at the sources you provided here.

[8] — This source fails WP:INDEPENDENT for having statements on quote like "I am", "We have", etc. N
[9] — This source fails WP:SIGCOV as it only passes mentions of the subject. N
[10] — This pieces was clearly disclaimed by the reliable Punch as a Sponsored Content, which makes it fail WP:INDEPENDENT. N
[11] — This reliable piece does not provide WP:SIGCOV on Onalaja in its entirety. N
[12] — This unreliable piece (what's a news story without a byline?) is WP:ROUTINE coverage. N
[13] — This does not provide WP:SIGCOV either, plus, it's WP:ROUTINE coverage. N
[14] — Only this piece I consider both reliable, independent of the subject and covers the subject to an extent. Y

I hope this helps your understanding of how sources are handled individually. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.

@Vanderwaalforces: Thank you for your valuable contributions, which will positively impact the article in the long run. I believe the article should be kept, and a notability tag can be placed to encourage further improvements.

Based on my opinion on the comments you made on the sources

[15] — This source fails WP:INDEPENDENT for having statements on quote like "I am", "We have", etc. N

Response: The source "60 Leading Real Estate CEOs of 2022 in Nigeria (Part B)" from The Guardian does contain quotes and statements directly from the CEOs, which might seem promotional. Nonetheless, it is crucial to recognize that such features often include direct quotes to provide insights directly from the subject being discussed. This does not inherently disqualify the source as non-independent.

[16] — This source fails WP:SIGCOV as it only passes mentions of the subject. N

Response: I respectfully disagree with the assertion that the source fails WP:SIGCOV due to only passing mentions of the subject. The article from This Day Live provides significant coverage of the controversy surrounding Onalaja's alleged unauthorized representation as the Chair of the Lagos Chapter. It details the reactions and statements from REDAN, offering context and specifics about the situation, which go beyond mere passing mentions. This level of detail and the focus of the article on this issue align with the criteria for significant coverage under WP:SIGCOV.

[17] — This pieces was clearly disclaimed by the reliable Punch as a Sponsored Content, which makes it fail WP:INDEPENDENT. N

Response: Reliability of the Source: Punch is a well-established and reputable news organization. The fact that they disclosed the sponsorship openly is a sign of their commitment to transparency. This transparency can help readers critically evaluate the content, but it does not automatically discredit the information presented.

Also the reliability of the information, one should look at the facts presented in the article itself and cross-reference them with other independent sources. If the claims about RevolutionPlus CEO Onalaja making Forbes Africa's Undiscovered Series list can be corroborated by other independent and credible sources, then the article’s content remains valid despite its sponsored nature.

[18] — This reliable piece does not provide WP:SIGCOV on Onalaja in its entirety. N

Response: This should be considered as providing significant coverage under WP:SIGCOV, as it thoroughly examines an important aspect of Onalaja's public and professional life.

[19] — This unreliable piece (what's a news story without a byline?) is WP:ROUTINE coverage. N

Response: While it's understandable to be cautious about sources lacking a byline, it's important to consider the broader context before deeming the piece unreliable. The absence of a byline doesn't automatically discredit the content; many reputable outlets occasionally publish articles without bylines for various reasons, such as protecting the identity of the journalist or because the piece was a collaborative effort.

[20] — This does not provide WP:SIGCOV either, plus, it's WP:ROUTINE coverage. N

Response: The source on the Onalajas’ induction into the Arch Klump Society represents a notable achievement within the philanthropic and service community, and the coverage in Independent.ng reflects the significance of their contributions both locally and globally.

Thank you again for your contribution

Coreyfranklin533 (talk) 10:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Coreyfranklin533 With your “Response”s it is clear that you do not understand how GNG works yet. Also, you explanations to do in how you got the image as your “Own work”, kindly do explain. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~

@Vanderwaalforces I appreciate your feedback, and I'm here to clarify any misunderstandings. Regarding my responses on how GNG work, I'm committed to continually improving and learning more about it.

Regarding the "Own work" label on my image, I recognize that there could be some confusion. Transparency is key. As a new contriubor who is open to learning, I want to assure you that I strictly follow ethical standards. When I mark an image as "Own work," it means I made it myself.

Coreyfranklin533 (talk) 11:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Coreyfranklin533 Okay, it is now clear that this is actuslly an article about yourself. You are strongly discouraged to write an article about yourself on English Wikipedia, see WP:AUTOBIO. It is an example of conflict of interest and violates Wikipedia’s policy on conflict of interest and in extension, will most likely violate the neutral point of view policy.

Also, please stop adding “Keep” to every of your replies, you’ve !voted three times now which is not supposed to be so. Please, strike any two of them. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@VanderwaalforcesThis article is clearly not about myself and it does not in anyway violates Wikipedia’s policy on conflict of interest. Like I have said, I am open to suggestions from the community to improve the article's neutrality and quality, and this can be done without nominating the article for deletion.

Thanks.

Coreyfranklin533 (talk) 11:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I drop the stick here. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep -~~ The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which will attain higher grades as it develops over time. Coreyfranklin533 (talk) 10:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 10:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is a PR based on other PR profiles. Mccapra (talk) 11:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mccapra The article doesn't showcase any public relations (PR) infleunce. Also, the sources mentioned are indeed credible and well-recognized .

Kindly expantiate what you mean by PR based in the narrative.

Coreyfranklin533 (talk) 12:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - @Coreyfranklin533: I feel the way you are going instead of dialogue, you might end up making this article I feel has potential be deleted. Portrait your point and allow admin or the closing editor to decide but to me I feel he is notable under WP:BASIC Otbest (talk) 13:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Otbest

Thank you for pointing that out. Coreyfranklin533 (talk) 14:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO as pointed out by the nominator. None of the businesses he founded are notable; the accolades he has received are also not notable. Three of the article's nine sources are about the subject receiving some sort of honorary reward. This article is pretty much WP:PROMO. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 14:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Versace1608 @Vanderwaalforces

The businesses he founded are indeed notable. They have made significant impacts in their respective industries and have been covered by reputable sources. The success and influence of these businesses contribute to his overall notability.

The subject has received accolades from Forbes Africa, which is a highly reputable and notable source.

I am open to corrections and welcome any suggestions for improvement to ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s standards.

Thank you

Coreyfranklin533 (talk) 14:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Silicon Slopes[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Silicon Slopes

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

Article is well sourced and well written, however, it does not refer to a municipality, but an ill-defined geographic area. Silicon Slopes is essentially a commercial high tech real estate project that over time grew out of Thanksgiving Point with a large amount (over 40%) of vacant real estate and this article is the ad for that . Article makes more sense merged into Utah Valley since having a standalone article is nothing more than advertising for commercial real estate in Lehi, Utah. Recommend delete or merge into the previously mentioned articles. KindHorta (talk) 05:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rusty Fein[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United States of America. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG due to WP:SIGCOV such as [[21]] and [[22]]. Let'srun (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aida Rybalko[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Lithuania. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The subject person fulfills WP:GNG with several Lithuanian sources that have provided SIGCOV (See Kauno diena[23] and 15min[24]). Her personal life has also received a certain extent of media coverage (See Lrytas.lt [25], 15min[26], and Delfi [27]).—Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 05:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Hennessey[edit]

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

Lacking of citations and General Notability Bennyaha (talk) 04:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Canada. Bennyaha (talk) 04:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corwin, Henry County, Indiana[edit]

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

Searches did not return any coverage of a settlement or community, and USGS topo maps do not show a community or even a name at this location. The GNIS entry lists its source as "Illustrated Historical Atlas of the State of Indiana. Chicago: Baskin, Forster and Company, 1876. An extensively illustrated atlas which includes several U.S. and Indiana thematic and political maps, and maps of counties, towns and cities. The atlas also has many illustrations and portraits, patrons' and business directories, county histories and a U.S. Post Office list." As far as I can tell this was never anything more than a named point on the railroad. –dlthewave ☎ 04:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. –dlthewave ☎ 04:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable railroad waypoint, nothing more. The name "Corwin" does appear on USGS topo maps starting in 2010, which makes me think someone as USGS just blindly entered the term from GNIS, much like the creator of this article certainly did. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 13:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Devora Radeva[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Bulgaria. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Nominator nominated 49 of these in 30 minutes. No discussion has followed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 03:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Candice Towler-Green[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and United Kingdom. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 03:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dominika Polakowska[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Corresponding article on Polish Wikipedia only contains one source that is a database and no significant coverage. My Google searches also come up with nothing else. Clara A. Djalim (talk) 10:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tatsuya Tanaka (figure skater)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Hong Kong. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Japan and Taiwan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This user has nominated 49 different figure skaters for deletion within approximately 30 mins which leaves me doubting that a WP:BEFORE search has been conducted, let alone one that includes native language sources. DCsansei (talk) 12:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment: As stated in the nomination, these were all PRODs that were deprodded in rapid succession. My work on these nominations took place before the PROD, not last night when I sent them to AFD. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:18, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep -- Nominator regularly bypasses WP:BEFORE searches. JTtheOG (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment: You're the one who de-prodded all of my nominations, so you don't get to complain now that they're at AFD, which is where nominations go when the PROD has been removed. Add to that your bad faith aspersions. A disagreement as to what qualifies as "significant coverage" is not evidence of bypassing anything. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete insuffient coverage.--Wish for Good (talk) 04:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prob delete - I'm not seeing RS. It is possible they exist in languages I don't read but if that's the case I encourage !keep voters to bring sources to the discussion. JMWt (talk) 08:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charissa Tansomboon[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Thailand. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Subject is now a researcher in online learning, though I'm not seeing anything that would indicate notability under WP:NPROF. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unable to find enough WP:SIGCOV from RS for this to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 17:48, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacqueline Voll[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Netherlands. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Voll placed third at the senior national championships in 2008 and 2009, as evidenced by the references given. She placed 2nd at the 2007 senior national championships but I can´t find online the results of that competition. Anyhow, there is no doubt that Voll meets Wikipedia:NSKATE. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 01:26, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bronze and silver medals at the senior national championships explicitly do not meet the criteria of WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:09, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You´re right, I misread. Criteria are rather strict, I´d say. I´ll strike through my keep vote Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- she doesn't fulfill the criteria, especially in current state. if theres more to add to the article, someone should add. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:52, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Qingyun[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and China. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandr Anichenko[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Azerbaijan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- She has participated in more than 3 Olympic [28] while presenting her country, She ought to be notable. Otbest (talk) 18:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pierre-Loup Bouquet[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and France. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fyodor Chernozubov[edit]

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

No sources and I have been unable to find any. Also does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 02:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Military, and Russia. Curbon7 (talk) 05:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Ck references on his article in ru.wp. Curbon7 (talk) 05:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. General who appears to have plenty of sourcing on Russian Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:08, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on the awards he received, unless some wants to argue that the ru.wiki sources are not adequate. Mccapra (talk) 06:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elliot Pennington[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United States of America. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Saucke-Lacelle[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG due to WP:SIGCOV such as [[29]] and [[30]]. Let'srun (talk) 13:45, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep -- Nominator regularly bypasses WP:BEFORE searches (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, etc. within the past week) and fails to address GNG in his nominations. Regardless, 50 AfDs in 30 minutes is wholly inappropriate. JTtheOG (talk) 17:32, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hayley Anne Sacks[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Israel, and New York. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unable to find more than some trivial mentions, and as such, this subject does not meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Please ping me if any significant coverage can be found. Let'srun (talk) 14:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kamil Białas[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep – Sources I got in my Google search may be related to significant coverage: 2010, January 2011, and December 2011. Clara A. Djalim (talk) 10:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marta Paoletti[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Italy. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isabella Pajardi[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Italy. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Novales[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Philippines. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep -- Nominator regularly bypasses WP:BEFORE searches and 50 AfDs in 30 minutes is wholly inappropriate. JTtheOG (talk) 19:08, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment: You're the one who de-prodded all of my nominations, so you don't get to complain now that they're at AFD, which is where nominations go when the PROD has been removed. Add to that your bad faith aspersions. A disagreement as to what qualifies as "significant coverage" is not evidence of bypassing anything. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

George Braakman[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United States of America. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject has some decent coverage at [[31]] and [[32]]. Not a ton here but probably enough to pass the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 14:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Nagle (figure skater)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United States of America. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 13:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Moir[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG with sources such as [[33]], [[34]] and [[35]]. Let'srun (talk) 13:16, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Natalia Mitsuoka[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Argentina. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG with the SkateToday article already in the article in addition to [[36]]. Let'srun (talk) 13:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olivia Nicole Martins[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesnt satisfy WP:GNG MaskedSinger (talk) 05:33, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siobhan McColl[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and South Africa. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandra Maksimova[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Belarus. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Again, despite discussion regarding the nominator's related Akiko Kitamura AfD in the same week, no discussion has occurred yet on this one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Krzysztof Komosa[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Despite discussion regarding the nominator's related Akiko Kitamura AfD in the same week, no discussion has occured yet on this one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yevhen Kholoniuk[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Meng (figure skater)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and China. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there is sufficient independent coverage.--Wish for Good (talk) 04:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 02:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Chu-hong[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and South Korea. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remember to provide rationale 104.232.119.107 (talk) 17:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That was an error; thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:11, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per rationale. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 22:20, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Sun-bin (figure skater)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and South Korea. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magdalena Leska[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Maguire (figure skater)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unable to find more than some trivial mentions, and as such, this subject does not meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Please ping me if significant coverage is found. Let'srun (talk) 14:09, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johanna Purdy[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unable to find more than some trivial mentions, this fails to meet the WP:GNG due to a seeming lack of WP:SIGCOV. Please ping me if significant coverage is found. Let'srun (talk) 14:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandr Levintsov[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Poland, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Veronika Kropotina[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Russia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aneta Kowalska[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zsolt Kosz[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Romania. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takuya Kondoh[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Japan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This user has nominated 49 different figure skaters for deletion within approximately 30 mins which leaves me doubting that a WP:BEFORE search has been conducted, let alone one that includes native language sources. DCsansei (talk) 12:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment: As stated in the nomination, these were all PRODs that were deprodded in rapid succession. My work on these nominations took place before the PROD, not last night when I sent them to AFD. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep -- Nominator regularly bypasses WP:BEFORE searches (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, etc. within the past week) and fails to address WP:GNG in his nominations. Regardless, 50 AfDs in 30 minutes is wholly inappropriate. JTtheOG (talk) 00:16, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, a comment for Procedural Keep is not an argument to Keep.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hirokazu Kobayashi (figure skater)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Japan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah-Marine Rouffanche[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and France. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of ONS built-up areas in England by population[edit]

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

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Social science, and England. Skynxnex (talk) 17:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As has been discussed on the talk page, this list relies on a single WP:PRIMARY source and has multiple WP:SYNTH issues. It is a poor summary of the primary source [UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) release] because it lacks the extensive contextualisation included in that source. In the absence of any secondary sources, it adds nothing to the original source. In terms of encyclopedic value, it is of dubious merit because the nomenclature chosen by the ONS conflicts with common usage and thus requires qualification by a complete list of included and excluded wards/parishes – which it doesn't have as that would require even more SYNTH violations.

The only alternative to outright deletion that I can see is to park it in draft space until the ONS produces its statistics by agglomeration (conurbation). There is a reason why no secondary sources have bothered to respond to this release of statistics: it is not useful. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I would like to point out List of urban areas in the United Kingdom,

ESPON metropolitan areas in the United Kingdom and multiple county by population articles should fall in the same category if the decision is to delete the article. If the ONS are releasing agglomerations (which is highly unlikely) these are would go on to List of urban areas in the United Kingdom unless both are (understandably to to me) merged if they do. JMF maybe you should have put the second paragraph in a separate reply with delete in bold as the first one paragraph sets the discussion and the second is your opinion and it would make it easier to skim down the bold to know which action or inaction is taken. Chocolateediter (talk) 16:52, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment is there consensus on which list the the 'definitive' one? Would it be possible to merge all the different place types into one page or even one table? The way population in the UK is broken down seems really inconsistent which know this has been discussed at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography. I added a comment on Talk:Birkenhead built-up area last week when I came across it because I feel the article's very existence does the opposite of adding to the sum of human knowledge. To stay on topic: the reason I ask is I would agree with the deletion of this page (and others) depending on page would remain. Orange sticker (talk) 21:21, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And that is the problem in a nutshell. Political boundaries (civil parishes, UAs etc.) are well defined but subject to sudden changes. Settlement boundaries are not well defined and are subject to 'creep' and merge. Political boundaries don't catch up, so you get nonsense like large parts of Reading that are excluded because they were built across the local authority line. Ditto Cambridge and Luton/Dunstable. Birkenhead (indeed the Wirral in total) is nothing like what it was 100 years ago, yet some people try very hard to insist that places that have merged are still distinct because they can't cope with the concept of a polycentric settlement, or can't accept that their "village" has become a suburb. So without a single undisputed definition of a settlement, we will never have a single undisputed list of settlements and (IMO at least) it is counterproductive and misleading to pretend otherwise. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:14, 10 May 2024 (UTC) revised 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep We often keep lists of populated places as published by reliable government sources. I don't see the SYNTH issue, any contextualisation can be edited into the article, and not useful is an argument to avoid as it's in the eye of the beholder. SportingFlyer T·C 17:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you consider it sensible to have a list that includes no part of Greater London whatever, doesn't recognise Greater Manchester, includes Solihull in "Birmingham", omits Caversham, Reading from "Reading" and Bletchley from "Milton Keynes"? In fact a list that has to qualify many name places to explain what they include and (prospectively) what they don't include. How is that useful? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The London region is a approximately a 5th of the UKs population and rough the same population as all the other nations combined so yes the ONS don’t record the areas BUAs like Scotland and Northern Ireland (it did for Wales).

Greater Manchester is a combined authority and county not a 2021BUA. Solihull is separate (number 63) to Birmingham. Chocolateediter (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This list is based on ONS data, excluding the Greater London and Manchester. It is not aligned to either geographical or political areas (example:Castle Point is split on this list is split into Canvey, Thundersley and South Benfleet but no mention of Hadleigh). It does even meet postal or phone code areas. So how useful is this to readers? Zero.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 17:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is what it is, a reproduction of ONS data, which is what it says it is, it's not our job to second guess or judge whether the ONS have got things right or not, merely to report it, which is what the article does. G-13114 (talk) 17:43, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indication of notability. Fails the general notability guideline - not presumed a notable subject by significant coverage in reliable sources, and has a sole significant source, being a primary source only and not independent of the subject - the ONS itself. Not justified under the notability criteria for a stand-alone list, with no indication that the list topic has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. Lacks encyclopedic value, being an abstruse segmentation of census data with such startling omissions and variable relationship to settlements as to be misleading. As to our job, it is not Wikipedia's job to reproduce, mirror or regurgitate ONS datasets as standalone lists. NebY (talk) 18:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep while the definition ONS uses is arguably primary its a secondary source for the places themselves and although there are many sources for places in England they will often have different definitions for different places/sources while this one is consistent for England even if the definition recently changed. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:20, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it's one of the few ONS geographic measures that captures unparished areas, which many towns are. Furthermore, the larger urban areas are subdivided into recognised cartographic areas by the UK's national mapping organisation, just because it doesn't match an administrative boundary (which is invisible on the ground anyway) doesn't mean it isn't valid. It's to give a snapshot of areas for very high level purposes, population stats of course don't remain static but it presents a reasonable idea of areas to readers. The Equalizer (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are two distinct issues here.

On the one hand, we have the original ONS data release, which is a 100% WP:RS for the purposes you describe. It is not perfect in some details (what is?) but by looking closely at the mapping, the individual data lines and the covering narrative, a sensible list can be drawn up. Which is exactly what a secondary source, CityPopulation.de, has done here. They have managed to produce a sensible, credible list.
On the other hand, we have this article, which amplifies the errors in the ONS report. (It is not for nothing that the ONS have declared that henceforth they will leave physical geography to the experts at the Ordnance Survey).

Your objective is entirely satisfied by the original data source: you haven't explained what value this article has added. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really unsure as to why citypopulation.de would be more reliable than actual census numbers. SportingFlyer T·C 17:19, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This article has all the same problems as the deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of localities in England by population. Its pretty much just a copy of it with updated data given a different name. Eopsid (talk) 19:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The objective of this article is, I assume, to present a meaningful, ordered table of population figures for named towns and cities in England (as in this article's original title) — something not provided by the data source, an ONS Excel spreadsheet; hence, there could be added value. However, the omission of Greater London sorely compromises this, because to the average reader it's likely seen as nonsensical. If there's a possibility we can fathom out a way round this shortcoming, I'd be looking to revise and keep, if we cannot, delete. The article can also serve as a navigational list to settlement articles and readers may want to use population as a means for selection; this does not necessarily require the notability of a standalone list. Rupples (talk) 22:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(2nd attempt at reply after losing last one due to a computer error creating human error grrrr)

What about using inner and outer London statistics from the "Population and household estimates, England and Wales: Census 2021" dataset[37] as they don’t fit in the district, county or regional list articles and don’t seem to have much municipal function. This could be in a section of its own above major and maybe also the key table with a little explainer. Both inner and outer London have populations above Birmingham so come in nicely above it.

Could add a second column with citypopulation.de statistics[38] if more than one source/viewpoint (since the site cites the ONS) is what some would like to have. Chocolateediter (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I assume most of the ONS BUA definitions do conform to what we regard as towns and cities, else there's a problem retaining the population figures in England settlement article infoboxes. Don't see why London Region can't be used [39] and London included — its the combined population of the London boroughs, which I suggest is the definition most people, at least in the UK, would associate as being London. The only other notes within the article where explanation seems to be required are Milton Keynes and Manchester. Are there others? "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" comes to mind. No one seems to be challenging List of built-up areas in Wales by population. Readers will rightly wonder why we don't have an equivalent for England, should this be deleted. Rupples (talk) 04:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we could easily explain why London is excluded from the data set, and include it maybe as a sub-heading, but I can't quickly find why it's excluded in a search, and in any case it's an editing problem, not a notability problem. SportingFlyer T·C 05:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but all those suggestions sound like WP:SYNTH to me. In regards to the List of built-up areas in Wales by population it has a lot of problems it uses two different definitions of built-up area because the ONS confusingly decided to use the same name for a different concept in the 2021 census. Eopsid (talk) 09:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well the Manchester note wasn’t really needed, It was only added it to prove a point with the Milton Keynes one as two users had problems with Bletchley being separate from Milton Keynes which it had also been separate for the 2011 census.

The explanation given by the ONS is:

"For the remainder of our analysis, we have removed London's 33 BUAs. This is because in Greater London, the method to identify BUAs does not recognise individual settlements in the same way. It instead provides data by London borough boundaries."

Which the ONS did pretty much do in 2011 and it went against analysis that the other areas had, they could have done some analysis though and I guess they might at a later date in a separate report. Chocolateediter (talk) 10:26, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination is not a criticism of the ONS. It is a proposal to delete a list that is a poor summary of the ONS list, reinforcing its errors and failing to reproduce its many caveats. (At least the ONS has some awareness of its weaknesses and inconsistencies.) It adds no value to the ONS list, it subtracts from it. We are not helping readers; if we can't do better than this then we must back away and refer readers to the source.

The best secondary source available is CityPopulation.de but that option has been rejected. They at least treat Luton/Dunstable, Bournemouth/Poole and Brighton/Hove as physically contiguous units: the ONS claims to ignore administrative boundaries but has not consistently done so. CityPopulation also ignores the ONS's sloppy toponymy (carving chunks out of places like Reading and Milton Keynes, then applying to the remainder the name of the whole) to give a sensible population report for the English cities. CityPopulation digests and makes sense of the raw ONS report; this article merely reinforces its confusions.

The only way out of this mess that I can see is to prefer the CityPopulation data. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:45, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a perception to state the ONS have made errors, not a fact. Neither the ONS data or CityPopulation figures will likely see agreement between interested editors for every one of their definitions, because neither set is produced to fit Wikipedia articles. The only set of population figures where there's probably no disagreement is for council area's with defined boundaries. Take Milton Keynes, which started the 'dispute' about this article, the 'best fit' figure for the population of Milton Keynes could have been the Milton Keynes BUA or the total of the Milton Keynes and Bletchley BUAs, but the editors of that article saw fit to define Milton Keynes as its larger urban area, so it's valid to include the agglomerated population. Luton has not been defined as 'Luton urban area including Dunstable and Houghton Regis' so it is not appropriate to link an agglomerated population figure to that article. Rupples (talk) 17:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When the ONS uses the name of the whole as the name of a part, as it has done in the case of (at least) Milton Keynes and Reading, then that is an error. But that is why we don't use primary sources as it usually needs a secondary source to take the long view, as CityPopulation has done.

Again, it is not the purpose of this nomination to denounce the ONS. They remain a highly reliable source of primary data and its analysis. The question is only whether it is valid for Wikipedia to copy their spreadsheet, taking it out of its contextual analysis. Why? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We use primary sources for statistics all the time. Otherwise we wouldn't have any population information anywhere on the site. SportingFlyer T·C 19:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is a fundamental misunderstanding of WP:PRIMARY. We cite statistical sources and rightly so. The issue here (and in the other lists that have already been deleted for the same reason) is that it is not legitimate to create an article that is a selective copy of the source. As WP:PRIMARY says 1. Primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 09:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment
- I believe that editors found the 2011 ONS built-up areas were useful, but that their sub-divisions were arbitrary and hard to understand.
- Many of the 2021 "built-up areas" are similar to the 2011 sub-divisions, and are equally hard to understand.
- For example, the Dunstable built-up area in this list has a population of 34,500, while the Dunstable article gives the population of the parish as 40,699. Readers might think there are 6,199 people living in the rural hinterland of Dunstable. They would be wrong; almost all the area covered by Dunstable Town Council is built-up. A comparison of the maps [40] and [41] shows that the ONS has allocated a large part of eastern Dunstable to the Luton built-up area.
- The list article says "built-up area boundaries are defined and named by the ONS". The ONS documentation is hard to follow. However, it seems that the Ordnance Survey are actually responsible, and their site [42] includes a 2022 "Technical specification" (with a methodology that considers land-use and "the Settlement Named Area dataset" to decide which 25-metre cells to merge together) and a "Release Note" (which says "Using customer feedback, improvements have been made in the [April] 2024 release, by refining the definition of a Built Up Area") but no updated "Technical specification".
- If the list article is retained, it must have a better explanation that mentions ways in which a "built-up area" might differ from what you expect. Ideally this explanation should be based on secondary sources, but I would be content if a mole inside the ONS were to edit the article and explain what is happening.
- The article should also explain about the "Related places" (are they included within or excluded from the area) and tell readers where they can find a map of each area. Perhaps they can be referred to citypoulation.de. The ONS interactive map does not seem to know about built-up areas. JonH (talk) 19:27, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The places named in the second column of the table in the article were recently dewikilinked to our articles on the related settlements thus nullifying the argument for the article being a navigational aid to finding those articles. AFAIK most England settlement articles use built up area as best available fit for population, so why dewiklink and place a hidden instruction not to wikilink? Granted, there are a few exceptions where BUA is not the best fit, but those instances can and were being noted. It should not have resulted in a 'carte blanche' dewikilinking. Rupples (talk) 14:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless the ONS BUA is the same as the settlement described in the article (which it often is not), then to wikilink it is a navigational aid over a precipice. We must not deliberately mislead our readers. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is not with this article as such but with the choice of Infobox used in our settlement articles. Liverpool uses Template:Infobox settlement which allows more than one definition of population — two population figures are shown in that article's infobox. Milton Keynes on the other hand uses Template:Infobox UK place which limits population to a single field. Rupples (talk) 16:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The strong consensus at WP:WikiProject UK geography is to prefer and seek to transition to Infobox UK Place when possible. Apart from being more customised to UK political geography, it avoids the clutter and trivia invited by Infobox settlement. If a detail is that significant, it should be in the body. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 09:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 02:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ryland Adams[edit]

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

This subject is far from notable by Wikipedia’s standards. There is a major lack of significant coverage addressing the subject directly, and the ones that do mention the subject fall short of being reliable sources. Majority of the sources listed are the subjects own YouTube channel or to instagram posts, see WP:NOSOCIAL. The subject falls incredibly short of the standards that are in place by Wikipedia to establish notability, as being married to someone famous does not make someone notable. 4theloveofallthings (talk) 01:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not meet the criteria set by Wikipedia to establish notability.

4theloveofallthings (talk) 02:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren Senft[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG with [[43]] and [[44]]. Let'srun (talk) 12:48, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alistair Sylvester[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Canada. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep -- Nominator regularly bypasses WP:BEFORE searches and 50 AfDs in 30 minutes is wholly inappropriate. JTtheOG (talk) 19:10, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment: You're the one who de-prodded all of my nominations, so you don't get to complain now that they're at AFD, which is where nominations go when the PROD has been removed. Add to that your bad faith aspersions. A disagreement as to what qualifies as "significant coverage" is not evidence of bypassing anything. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject meets the WP:GNG with sources such as [[45]] and [[46]]. Let'srun (talk) 14:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A comment to "procedural keep" is not an argument on why an article should be Kept. I'm relisting this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Super Magick[edit]

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

Found no signs of notability (some notable publications covered the announcement/lead single but it's not exactly NMUSIC#1 level) and redirected. That's been undone, so now we're here. Got a response on my talk page including "That's an actual published album by a known rock band that has been producing albums for decades"; just wanna emphasize NOTINHERITED here in case they or anyone else is thinking of bringing that up. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The St. Louis Post Dispatch wrote that it was “finally” available, meaning it was anticipated and notable. Repeating that several notable publications did write about it as well.

This group has released several singles that don’t need their own pages, several live albums that don’t need their own page. However, this album was released on various media and noted in the press. This is a notable article, and sits alongside other albums in their discography, for informational and educational purposes.

I would like to note that people come to Wikipedia to find information, and undoubtedly will look for this album’s information. Deleting the page does not serve users’ interests at all. Louie Mantia (talk) 01:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or "finally" just means "after a long time", and it has been a decade since their last album. And even if that were a good sign for notability, the piece is mostly an interview in which the writer only really says the same things about the album that the announcements cover, including the 93x "article" which is stated at the bottom as a press release from Frankly Media. The Riff review is good, but it's still not enough, and I know there's nothing else because I already looked and saw all of what you've added but that was it, hence why I redirected in the first place.

I already brought up NOTINHERITED because it was clearly necessary to mention, but I didn't realize I would need to point out multiple other sections of that page as well, namely WP:INTERESTING, WP:USEFUL, and WP:ABOUTEVERYTHING which pretty much all came up in your case just now. And if users are "undoubtedly" looking for this info, it can always be added to the band's page where I sent the redirect and readers will find it there just fine and be satisfied. I'll even support that as a merge argument if you're on board for it. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 02:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reason this article was nominated for deletion was there were “no signs of notability.”

After that, it was immediately noted by you (QuietHere) that there were some notable publications. There is also at least one notable review, from Riff Magazine. I think we can safely say that “no signs of notability” is an inaccurate assessment. An argument can be made that there are “few” (by what measure?), but I think “none” would be too far.

I think these few sources specifically address the requirement to prove it is notable, but as @Oaktree b also pointed out, it may be too soon, as the album was released only a week ago. It’s possible more will come up, but as of this moment, it does seem to me that there are valid, suitable sources already cited in the article.

Entirely separate from my argument and unrelated to the bit about deletion, I am a bit hurt by the condescending tone you’ve (QuietHere) brought to this, notably “in case they or anyone else is thinking of bringing that up” and “I didn't realize I would need to point out multiple other sections of that page as well,” both of which imply some level of superiority, which I think is just hurtful and not constructive for this discussion. I think your argument can be made without that. Louie Mantia (talk) 12:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: Also found this in the Tennessean [47] which is an interview with the singer, but talks about the album. With the American Songwriter article, just barely enough. Is likely TOOSOON as the album was released on the 3rd of May, more might pop up. Oaktree b (talk) 04:08, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at this Riff Magazine link [48], it's not listed as a RS in Wiki Project album, but it seems ok. Another interview where they also talk about the album. Oaktree b (talk) 04:10, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more discussion and input from editors. But from what I'm reading here, deletion is off the table and we are trying to decide between Keeping a standalone article or a Redirect/Merge closure. Either way, the content would be preserved in case there are more reviews in the future.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jang Sok-chol[edit]

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 02:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grigori Chernozubov[edit]

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

Clearly fails notability guidelines, no significant coverage. No reason for this article. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 00:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The page on Russian Wikipedia seems to be more in-depth and has more sources. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 10:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is still no notability, and one "brief" biography isn't really enough to build an entire article.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 13:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. He has a plaque dedicated to him, and streets namead after him, should be expanded with transation from Russian version F.Alexsandr (talk) 23:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to speak the language, I will be happy to withdraw the request if you can bring it up to snuff.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 00:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per comments above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: On the one hand, there is no support for deletion. On the other hand, the keep argument is not strong. Let's hear some more thoughts on this before passing a verdict.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 00:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I can see multiple Google books refs in Russian. Mccapra (talk) 07:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Polly Namaye[edit]

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

The first source is a blog, the 5th source is Twitter. Sources 2-4 are dead. Fails WP:BIO. No notability from the roles she has had. LibStar (talk) 00:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Uganda. LibStar (talk) 00:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject not notable, just known as a police woman. from searches on google she still doesn't meet WP:GNG.--Meligirl5 (talk) 10:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thistle Dew Dessert Theatre[edit]

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

A google search for the topic found only the website, a local guide, and user-generated information. Also I couldn't find any of the first 5 sources online, and 6th source is trivial coverage. Therefore not notable.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Helping get rid of non-notable articles
Keep: I'd like to AGF that the offline sources are legit, in which case there is SIGCOV. Perhaps an editor with access the relevant archives can verify? -- D'n'B-t -- 10:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Theatre. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Hajizade[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Delete: Article is well written, however, feels like PROD--Correspondentman (talk) 06:36, 17 May 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 May 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Azerbaijan. Shellwood (talk) 11:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Journalism, and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files[edit]

File:Escapade (play).jpg[edit]

This is not a faithful two-dimensional reproduction of the play's poster (pamphlet?). Someone could take a photo of it and release the photo under a free license, per WP:FREER as well as WP:GETTY, point 16. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 02:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Benedictine College Wordmark.png[edit]

Fails WP:NFCC#3- minimal number of non free images- as well as WP:NFCC#8, as it doesn't significantly enhance the article any more than the actual college logo itself. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder whether {{PD-textlogo}} might apply here. Clear delete if not (NFCC#10c also not met). Stifle (talk) 11:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think textlogo would apply given the B and cross device on the left, but whether that qualifies as sufficiently creative to be PD anyway I don't know. Thryduulf (talk) 11:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:Conspiracist media[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Conspiracist media (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: This category contains medias that are mainstream, and most of these are from certain countries. Coddlebean (talk) 06:09, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete; perhaps upmerge A lot of these are indeed conspiracist media, like InfoWars. But categories are not a place where we can verify their status as conspiracist. That's a job for reliable sources in articles. WP:RSP can help. But verification of membership is probably a time-consuming effort. If we don't do that verification regularly, this risks becoming a WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. But perhaps we should upmerge the category to its parents? NLeeuw (talk) 06:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerging does not solve the problem, it just moves the problem to another place. Besides Category:Alternative media is certainly not a proper merge target. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair points. NLeeuw (talk) 08:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lean to delete, considering the fact that many articles are already in a more specific subcategory of Category:Conspiracy theories I don't think this category adds much value in itself. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep These are not mainstream media; they are something else. Whether or not they are mostly from certain countries is beside the point; they are from wherever they are from. Specific media outlets are quite different from specific theories and, as such, are not (and should not be) in the random set of articles I looked at in Category:Conspiracy theories. Hmains (talk) 18:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, to distinguish between media promoting conspiracy theories and those merely investigating them. Paleontologist99 (talk) 16:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 15:25, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American Splendor artists[edit]

Convert Category:American Splendor artists to article American Splendor

Nominator's rationale: There is no scheme of Category:Artists by comic title or some such and this is analogous to WP:PERFCAT. Just make sure they are all listed (with citations) at the article on the comic. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me that this is a useful category as it includes people not usually associated with their artwork, such as Alan Moore and Joyce Brabner. American Splendor was a unique title in many ways, given it was written by a single person but with dozens of different artists; it seems fitting that it merits a relatively unique category.

As a compromise, what if the category was just converted to "Category: American Splendor", not specifying artists? stoshmaster (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If artists are purged the category will become empty. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What I meant was convert this category simply to "American Splendor" and it will house all things related to American Splendor, including the writers, artists, the film, and all related books (if they have separate articles) stoshmaster (talk) 20:35, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That would not solve anything. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a defining characteristic of the subjects in this category. Moving this to article space is a good compromise between instant deletion and keeping. As a preliminary measure the category content may be copied to Talk:American Splendor before the category is deleted. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 16:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I again propose that this category be rethought/renamed to Category:American Splendor where it will encompass all things related to American Splendor, including the writers, artists, the film, and all related books (if they have separate articles) -- stoshmaster (talk) 20:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds much like WP:OCASSOC and, again, it would not solve the problem at hand. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC) (added after relisting)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 15:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional toothed whales[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Fictional toothed whales (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one article and it is not about a fictional character but about a literary work. (Oinkers42) (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - While the name of the work is the fictional character (so the character should be tagged, not the work), a single-entry category is not helpful. Tag the character article with the parent category, remove the tag from the work article, and remove this category. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Category:Fictional whales per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jat politicians from Rajasthan[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Jat politicians from Rajasthan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: As per long standing consensus here, biographies of living people cannot be categorised by caste.Ratnahastin (talk) 14:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish delicatessens in Oregon[edit]

Propose merging Category:Jewish delicatessens in Oregon to Category:Jewish delicatessens in the United States

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge to parent category; only has one category layer. No need to upmerge to Category:Delicatessens in Oregon as its already in Category:Delicatessens in Portland, Oregon. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nuclear technology companies of Argentina[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Nuclear technology companies of Argentina (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one page in the category FightBrightTigh (talk) 10:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete agree with nom. Pointless with one entry. LibStar (talk) 10:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the article is already in Category:Defense companies of Argentina and it is not about a nuclear technology company per se. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Engineering companies of Algeria[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Engineering companies of Algeria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one page in the category FightBrightTigh (talk) 10:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the article is already in Category:Defence companies of Algeria and Category:Truck manufacturers of Algeria and that is exactly what it is about. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:03, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Engineering companies of Israel[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Engineering companies of Israel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one page in the category. FightBrightTigh (talk) 10:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- COmment But the entry should be mergdeg inth Mnufacturing companiess of Israel Hugo999 (talk) 11:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and move the article (but not the subcategory) to Category:Manufacturing companies of Israel. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:East German people by ethnic or national origin[edit]

Propose deleting Category:East German people by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:East German people of British descent

Nominator's rationale: delete, redundant category layer with only one subcategory which is already part of Category:Immigrants to East Germany. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Northern Mariana Islands people by ethnic or national origin[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Northern Mariana Islands people by ethnic or national origin to Category:Northern Mariana Islands people by descent
Propose renaming Category:Transnistrian people by ethnic or national origin to Category:Transnistrian people by descent
Propose renaming Category:Cebuano people by ethnic or national origin to Category:Cebuano people by descent

Nominator's rationale: rename for consistency. Both parent and child categories are "by descent". Marcocapelle (talk) 08:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Romanian people by ethnic or national origin and occupation[edit]

Propose merging Category:Romanian people by ethnic or national origin and occupation to Category:Romanian people by occupation

Nominator's rationale: merge, redundant category layer with only two subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Montana articles lacking sources[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Montana articles lacking sources (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: The category is not connected to a template so not helpful as maintenance category. If kept should either have a template created, or be tied to Template:WikiProject Montana. Gonnym (talk) 08:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cricket lists incorrectly assessed as articles[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Cricket lists incorrectly assessed as articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: I can't find this category used by Template:WikiProject Cricket. This was probably used by a previous version of the code or a now deleted sub-template and is no longer used. Gonnym (talk) 07:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Middle Eastern people by ethnic or national origin[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people by ethnic or national origin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of African descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Asian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of European descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of North American descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Oceanian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of South American descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Jewish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Algerian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of African-American descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Beninese descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Cape Verdean descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Egyptian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Ethiopian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Ghanaian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Guinean descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Kenyan descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Libyan descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Moroccan descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Nigerian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Sudanese descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Tunisian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Afghan descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Armenian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Bangladeshi descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Chinese descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Filipino descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Indian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Indonesian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Iranian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Iraqi descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Israeli descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Japanese descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Jordanian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Kuwaiti descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Lebanese descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Bengali descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Pakistani descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Palestinian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Saudi Arabian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Syrian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Vietnamese descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Yemeni descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Albanian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Bosnia and Herzegovina descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of British descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of English descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Scottish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Bulgarian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Circassian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Croatian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Czech descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Danish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Finnish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of French descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Greek descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Irish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Montenegrin descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Norwegian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Polish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Portuguese descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Russian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Serbian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Slovenian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Spanish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Turkish descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Yugoslav descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of American descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Canadian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Cuban descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Guatemalan descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Australian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of New Zealand descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Brazilian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Peruvian descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Middle Eastern people of Uruguayan descent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: We do not categorize descent categories by regions; we only group them by continents and countries. I do not see any valid reason to make an exception for the Middle East. They are all just container categories. Note: Category:People of Middle Eastern descent is the opposite; I do not propose to delete it! Aldij (talk) 07:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Normally I would have said, disperse between Asian and African, but I believe that the subcategories are already in these trees. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Abolish Self Government Coalition politicians[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Abolish Self Government Coalition politicians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: As per WP:SMALLCAT LibStar (talk) 07:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this is not helpful for navigation. (Note that WP:SMALLCAT is defunct because it contained a number of too subjective clauses.) Marcocapelle (talk) 09:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Defunct World TeamTennis teams[edit]

Propose merging Category:Defunct World TeamTennis teams to Category:World TeamTennis teams

Nominator's rationale: 1.) we don't categorize by current status and 2.) the league is defunct, so all teams are defunct. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, I do not know about (1) but (2) alone is an obvious enough reason for merging. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women's Premier League (cricket) sub-categories[edit]

Propose renaming

Nominator's rationale: In order to match the Parent article / category's naming pattern. Vestrian24Bio (U • T • A • C • S) 04:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merged requests Vestrian24Bio (U • T • A • C • S) 04:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename, seems like a speedy WP:C2D case. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cask strength[edit]

Propose merging Category:Cask strength to Category:Whisky

Nominator's rationale: This category is really not helpful for navigation. I tried to find a 2nd parent category, and it made it clear to me that we really don't need a category for Cask strength Mason (talk) 02:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just delete, the articles are already in Category:Whisky and Category:Scottish malt whisky respectively. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1940 Michigan-Ontario Collegiate Conference football season[edit]

Propose deleting Category:1940 Michigan-Ontario Collegiate Conference football season (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Category lacks subjects Let'srun (talk) 01:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, categorization by year suffices in this case. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:25, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Michigan-Ontario Collegiate Conference football seasons[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Michigan-Ontario Collegiate Conference football seasons (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Only one subcategory. Let'srun (talk) 01:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; part of well-established tree. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, categorization by year suffices in this case. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Singles by decade by record label[edit]

Propose merging Category:Singles by decade by record label, Category:2000s Atlantic Records singles, Category:2010s Atlantic Records singles, Category:2020s Atlantic Records singles, Category:2000s Island Records singles, Category:2010s Island Records singles, Category:2020s Island Records singles, Category:Atlantic Records singles by decade, and Category:Island Records singles by decade to Category:Atlantic Records singles, Category:Island Records singles, various singles-by-year categories as appropriate and delete the main container cat.

Nominator's rationale: No need to break them up by decade--that would be better handled with a discography anyway--and no need to have the scheme Category:Singles by decade (in the 21st century only) and record label. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:52, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, there was already a discussion about this. Sahaib (talk) 05:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 01:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: no accurate reliable sources to verify such a classification, even the category descroption says "This category is not necessarily indicative of total loss of population, traditions, language or culture - each specific case may have particular individual contexts" that its unable to be clearerly define or even confirm that the launguage, culture, people, knowledge, country is actually extinct Wikipedia should not be categorising as such. Gnan garra 13:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Gnan garra 09:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gnangarra The category description can be changed. If articles can use past tense words like "were" and "was" in reference to a tribe, I'm not seeing why the word "extinct" is out of question. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 18:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is the issue of using the "tribes" to decsribe Indigenous Countries, Cultures and People in Australia is inaccurate at best racist at worst. The term itself implies a lot of colonial misinformation and a distinct lack of understanding of Indigenous Cutlures in Australia. The use of past tense in words like were or was is also not an indicator of the Indigenous Countries, cultures, languages or peoples continuation. Very specifically by calling a Country extinct that frees the restriction of cultural protocols applying when working on with Indugenous Cultural materials. All countries are still in existance and are represented through Land Councils who manage everything from protocols on entering a country, to land rights. My reasoning is not playing words games its saying that the assumption of being extinct is a misnomer, even in languages and cultures where a recent Language conference in Queensland a professor was luaghed off stage when he stated that a language was extinct yet multiple people stood up and spoke the language. Without rocksolid gold plate sources published within the last 4 years the label of extinct is a false narrative derived from the recent history wars, and anti landrights campaigners. The other issue we have is the Australian Bureau of Statistics problematic collection of reliable data as it records just one language spoken not all In the context of the Census, 'Indigenous' or 'First Nations' results are defined by respondents who have answered that they are of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander background. There are over 230 Australian Indigenous Languages that the Census records which is less than the actual number of Indigenous languages.[49]. Gnan garra 09:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the use of "tribe" isn't my decision. It is used for many articles about Aboriginal Australian groups, so that seems to perhaps be a wider issue worth fixing. What is the continuation of a group like the Toogee? What is the relevant land council? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 07:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tribe is not used in Australia, the poor use of terms in Wikipedia articles is one of the many barriers people working with Indigenous cultures struggle to address as shows Wikipedia in a bad light and not respectful of the culture. Basically ticks all the racists, Inforwar, challenge faced out on the street its up to us to lift our standards. Gnan garra 12:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, it is questionable if ethnic groups become extinct at all. A language may become extinct for sure, but ethnic groups mostly dissolve in other ethnic groups. - But this comment applies to the whole tree of Category:Extinct ethnic groups. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle Aren't we talking about cultural extinction? Are you defining extinction as the literal death of all group members without any descendants? That seems like an unorthodox interpretation. The Susquehannock people are extinct as a tribe, despite having some descendants in the Seneca-Cayuga Nation. I don't see any contradiction here. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 18:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Frustratingly, the term "extinct" seems to be used somewhat inconsistently for both cultural extinction and the death of all group members (at least, from a google search). Is there a better term we could use to distinguish the two? Category:Extinct ethnic groups is currently a subcategory under Category:Human extinction which implies the latter, so perhaps it should be renamed and/or categorized differently if most of the members are groups that are only culturally extinct. Psychastes (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seneca-Cayuga Nation is not an Indigenous Country in Australia, you are making comparisons that are not like for like. Gnan garra 09:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And? I'm addressing Marcocapelle's statement about the broader category tree. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 04:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If not an outright deletion then certainly a renaming to be more clear would seem to be a good idea.★Trekker (talk) 20:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What would you propose and why? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 04:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Genocide happens. Wishful thinking doesn't change that. "Extinct" is a harsh and ugly word to apply to people; it's natural to recoil in disgust at the idea. It may be very appealing to think that a group "didn't really go extinct" because some of their descendants blended into other groups. But if the group no longer exists as a distinct people with a distinct culture and language, the group really is extinct. Perhaps something like Category:Former Indigenous peoples would be less noxious to the moral sense of the reader. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 04:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Genocide happens — In particular Genocide of Indigenous Australians. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mitch Ames That leads to two questions. Is there even one example in all of Australian history of an entire group being murdered without any known descendants? Are there any examples of groups who, through genocidal violence and assimilation, ceased to exist as distinct cultural groups? In both cases, there would have to be terminology to describe a group that once was and now is no longer. If not "extinct", there would still have to be some other description. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 10:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, we need to be careful not to conflate "genocide" and "extinction". Genocide does not require killing all of the people - it is defined as "intentional destruction ... in whole or in part". Extinction requires that they all die, but doesn't require intent. There may be an overlap, but they are not the same thing, and neither implies the other. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
agree genocide doesnt equate to extinction. @Bohemian Baltimore perhaps you should start with List of massacres of Indigenous Australians to understand the extent of Geonicidal acts in Australia. Gnan garra 12:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnangarra Since my meaning apparently wasn't clear; there are genocidal acts of violence which lead to the literal or cultural destruction of peoples. What terminology would you use to refer to groups that have been physically annihilated in entirety through genocidal violence, disease, etc? What terminology would you use to refer to historical groups that may have living descendants but that are no longer culturally distinct due to genocidal violence, etc? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is the issue the assumptions here are made based on the use of past tense language in the article, none of them have any reliable sources to support being included in this category. Given that the category itself should be deleted. Gnan garra 13:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gnangarra There are a small number of articles. I do not have a strong opinion on the category, whether it should be renamed or deleted. But I reiterate my question; are there any historical Indigenous Australian groups that can be said to have once existed but that no longer do? What terminology should be used to refer to those historical groups? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 15:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I dont have any reliable sources to answer that question, all I know is the articles in this category dont have reliable sources to even be included in the category. The whole purpose of raising it here is exatcly the category itself not some wider theoretical discussion on meanings or what ifs. I gather I can remove them all from this category for lack of sourcing that clearly supports the claim. Gnan garra 12:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitch Ames I'm not conflating genocide and extinction; I myself belong to a group whose history includes the former but not the latter. But I would question why the word extinction has to automatically mean everybody dies. I don't think a term like "cultural extinction" implies that. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
why the word extinction has to automatically mean everybody dies — Because when we are talking about people, that's what the word means "Extinction is the termination ... by the death of its last member." Admittedly if we are talking about culture we could say that the group is extinct if nobody belongs to it. (If we all gave up editing and WMF deleted Wikipedia, Wikipedians could be said to be "extinct", but most us would still be alive.)

My main point here is that we should probably not use the word "genocide" in this discussion, because it is neither necessary nor sufficient for "extinction", and is unnecessarily emotive. Yes genocide happened, but that does not determine whether a particular people is extinct or not. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mitch Ames Okay. So what terminology should we use for "cultural extinction"? What terminology should we use to refer to historical groups that no longer exist as distinct cultures? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 15:26, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The term "cultural extinction" is not helpful at all. Even if there is no tangible remainders of a culture you never know how much of customs and oral literature have been exchanged with and integrated in other cultures. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but that doesn't mean that the group still exists. So what terminology would you use for a group that once existed and does not now? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 17:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd prefer using no terminology at all over inaccurate terminology. The articles are fine in Category:Aboriginal peoples of Queensland anyway. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: having now been through every article not one defines the culture, people, or country as extinct, sadly Tindale works from 1974 is the primary source in every article and the most recent. The issue there their inclusion is based on whoever started the article using a generic type sentence like according to tindale they (some past tense word) from this area in Queensland. Ironically the only article with recent sourcing is about the current issue of domestic violance in Australia which makes no sense as its in this category. Gnan garra 12:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably you could solve the problem by changing "The Xxxx were ..." to "The Xxxx are ..." (other verb tense changes as appropriate), and providing a reliable source to support the statement of their continued existence. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could change the wording, but as all the articles are basically say Tindale described these countries on his map as being xxxx, their inclusion in the category isnt based on reliable sources or hints of a reference to Extinct. I suggest the category becomes extinct. Gnan garra 14:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Possible alternatives to "extinct", for the purposes of renaming the category (tree):
* Historical: we already have Category:Historical ethnic groups of Australia - which possibly should be merged (one way or the other) with Category:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia. Note that Category:Extinct ethnic groups is a subcat of Category:Historical ethnic groups, so probably Category:Extinct Indigenous peoples of Australia (if it remains) should be a subcat of Category:Historical ethnic groups by continent
* nonextant
Mitch Ames (talk) 01:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 01:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - for the record I had created this category in response to seeing a universal category being created for Extinct Indigenous groups, including Australian people, it seemed at the time better to identify the Australian component of an apparent claim. Note that by creating the category, I did not necessarily agree with either the category title or its assumptions, which is why I placed in bold comments as to the very specific event/issue raised in articles. I am intrigued by the discussion to date, as it seems either concentrating upon category trees and related subjects, or the issues of how to name groups of people who have been affected by reduction or severe loss of population. As the process in this particular part of wikipedia is relative to categories, there is a problem as to whether the actual subject is best ventured as to the veracity of terminology. It could be for everyones advantage to delete the original parent category, and find somewhere other than this CFD to explore the issues that are raised here. A collaborative approach to the wider wikipedian understanding of how to 'frame' the larger world wide issue of how and when ethnic groups have decimation of population is something well beyond the bounds of this cfd, and to simply arrive at a decision here on one small perspective does the larger project some significant disservice. Definitely not a 'free for all' RFC or similar, it needs a very specific guideline and process that works through the issues raised here, for the larger project. But then this is wikipedia, anything could happen. JarrahTree 02:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alder carrs[edit]

Convert Category:Alder carrs to article Alder carr

Nominator's rationale: I don't really know what to do with this category. I think it's for a very specific kind of wetland that only applies to a specific kind of tree. This category feels like a non-defining intersection between kind of tree and kind of landform, but I'm not an expert. Mason (talk) 00:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This category appears regularly as a feature on early Ordnance Survey maps. Leutha (talk) 08:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rebel princes[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Rebel princes to Category:Princely rebellions
Alt proposal: split Category:Rebel princes into (A) Category:Rebel princes and (B) Category:Princely rebellions

Nominator's rationale: WP:C2D: main article princely rebellion. NLeeuw (talk) 22:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alt proposal rationale by Marcocapelle (opposed speedy rename): this is a category of princes, not so much of rebellions. Perhaps split. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: which option?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 00:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fwiw, I would also be fine with keeping as is. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Officers of Ipswich Corporation[edit]

Propose merging Category:Officers of Ipswich Corporation to Category:Ipswich Corporation

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There is only one page here, which isn't helpful for navigation. I strongly encourage the category creator not to create categories with only one page in them. Mason (talk) 00:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Category:Ipswich Corporation to Category:History of Ipswich. It is very unhelpful to create a separate category for every article. I will tag Category:Ipswich Corporation too. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Religious buildings and structures destroyed in the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Religious buildings and structures destroyed in the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent to Category:Hindu temples destroyed during the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent

Nominator's rationale: rename per actual content. They are all Hindu temples. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. 08:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nederlandse Leeuw (talk • contribs)
Rename perhaps as Category:Religious structures destroyed during the Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent. The structures destroyed during that period include not just Hindu temples but also Jain and Buddhist ones (i.e., all idol-worshiping Indian religions). Rasnaboy (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the alt rename?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 00:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rasnaboy has just added Jain temples, Halebidu to the category. I suggest to move this article to Category:Destroyed temples and have the rename pursued as nominated. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Armenian screenwriters by century[edit]

Propose merging Category:Armenian screenwriters by century to Category:Armenian screenwriters

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. There's only one category in here, which isn't helpful for navigation. (Even if a 2nd category were made, it still wouldn't be helpful as this is the only category in the in parent) Mason (talk) 20:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. By the way the subcategory covers the century that is probably the least interesting to people who study history of literature. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The problem here is that Category:21st-century Armenian screenwriters is using the standardized {{Screenwriters by nationality and century category header}} framework — but that template autogenerates an artificially-transcluded "[Country-named-in-this-category] screenwriters by century" as a standard part of its formatting. But that can't be left to sit there redlinked, so either it has to exist regardless of any size issues, or we have to wrap the template in {{suppress categories}} to bork its category generation and then manually file Category:21st-century Armenian screenwriters in the other categories that still exist. But that would defeat the entire purpose of using the standardized template in the first place, and would have the side-effect of stranding that category from the Category:Screenwriters by nationality and century tree.
I'm not at all wedded to this being essential, and have personally wrapped many category-generating templates in the suppress categories wrapper when necessary, but just wanted to point out that there are "standardized formatting" considerations here beyond size.
Really, it's more a question of whether Category:Armenian screenwriters need any by-century categorization yet — with only six people in the 21st-century category and only 20 in the parent, it's not clear that subbing them out for century is needed at all — but if the 21st-century category does exist, then this is automatically imposed and transcluded by the template as a standard and expected parent for it, so the question is really less about the need for this than it is the need for a 21st-century category to exist at all. Bearcat (talk) 15:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearcat, I'm not sure how the this comment is relevant to the nomination at hand. And, for the record, it isn't the case the FOOian occupation by century needs to exist. That category is only added if it exists, otherwise, the category is added to FOOian screenwriters. Mason (talk) 19:43, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a person who works regularly with cleaning up redlinked categories at Special:WantedCategories, I have to deal with new redlinked categories autogenerated by occupation header templates of this type all the phunking time. So just telling me that they suppress redlinks isn't convincing when I routinely see hard evidence that they don't. Bearcat (talk) 13:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have examples of this that are recent (like since April 6th)? Because each time there's been an red link, I've added a fix to address it [50]. The present code exclusively uses resolve category redirects and checks if the category exists before it adds it. If you have evidence to the contrary, I would really like to see it so that I can figure out what is not working as intended. Mason (talk) 20:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkl talk 16:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 00:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ships built on the River Orwell[edit]

Propose merging Category:Ships built on the River Orwell to Category:Ships built in England

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This is a redundant layer. Mason (talk) 00:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as level is redundant. So perhaps is also Category:Ships built in Suffolk. Both have just the same single subcat Category:Ships built in Ipswich, which can indeed sit alongside other towns in Category:Ships built in England - Davidships (talk) 10:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Populated places on the Underground Railroad[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Populated places on the Underground Railroad (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Specific buildings which served as stations on the Underground Railroad are absolutely defined by it but an entire town, city or county is usually not. In some cases, certain locales like New Bedford, Massachusetts were such hubs of the Underground Railroad that they should be kept in the main category but that can be done on a case by case basis. User:Namiba 15:30, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep These are historically related places. They were certainly defining for these places during the historical period involved here: 1840s and 1850s in the United States. These illegal activities were something that many people in a place were at least silently aware of and did not bring to the attention of law enforcement. In many cases, the articles do not point to a specific building(s) so there is no use in thinking that will keep tying these together, as they should be. Hmains (talk) 18:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it defining though? In most cases, no. Neither Portland, Maine nor most other cities are not defined by the fact that they had a stop in the Underground Railroad. For cities which are defined as such, they can and should be categorized within the tree. If you can show otherwise, I will withdraw the nomination.--User:Namiba 17:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 00:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hindu temples destroyed by Muslims[edit]

Propose merging Category:Hindu temples destroyed by Muslims to Category:Destroyed Hindu temples

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge. There's really not a need to diffuse this category by perpetrator Mason (talk) 04:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure. There is also Category:Churches destroyed by Muslims and all of it is part of Category:Persecution by Muslims. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:28, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmmm I don't think Category:Mosques converted from churches should be a subcategory of Category:Churches destroyed by Muslims. If "destruction" is to be taken as physical devastation of a building so that it becomes a ruin or a heap of rubble, you can't just make a mosque out of that. I suggest to Template:Category see also these cats to each other instead of giving them a parent-child link. NLeeuw (talk) 23:09, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair point. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:09, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Current thoughts on merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 00:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

2023-24 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament[edit]

2023-24 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament → Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

2023–24 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament → Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete to encourage article creation, consistent with 2022–23 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Pretty common for these types of redirects to exist and there's nothing stopping someone from starting an article. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boston Incident[edit]

Boston Incident → Boston Massacre (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This isn't commonly referred to as "Boston incident"; searching the term finds little about the massacre compared to other incidents (such as the 2007 Boston Mooninite panic). In the cases where the massacre is referred to with this term, it's only in a descriptive fashion and not as an actual name. Redirect was created by a quickly-reverted WP:POINTy page move in 2006. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete one would think the Boston Tea Party or Battle of Bunker Hill would be better -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 03:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - although it seems ambiguous (my first thought was the Boston Marathon bombing) the article on the Boston Massacre notes in the lede that the event is also known as the "Incident on King Street"; "Boston incident" is a plausible misremembering. It's a more neutral title anyway, the article also notes in the lede that calling it a "massacre" was American patriot propaganda. As far as I can tell, the other events listed here aren't widely known as named "incidents". If deleted then don't disambiguate, search results would handle this better. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per Ivan. Queen of ♡ | Speak 20:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't find a primary topic. GScholar results, for example, are split primarily between the current target and the Boston Marathon bombing. When referring to the current target, they seem to be mainly quoting from primary sources. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Telephonics Corporation[edit]

Telephonics Corporation → Griffon Corporation#Telephonics Corporation/Defense Segment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Telephonics Corporation is no longer owned by Griffon Corporation. If Telephonics is not sufficiently notable for its own article, the redirect should be deleted. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Telephonics Corporation has a section at the target article (Griffon Corporation#Telephonics Corporation), which includes a mention of its sale. I'm unsure why this redirect needs to be deleted - even though the company seems to have been sold, this section of the Griffon Corporation article still seems to contain the most information on the company that Wikipedia currently has, and so - in the absence of an article on Telephonics Corporation - seems to be the best target to send readers looking for information on it to. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 11:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jonny cochrane[edit]

Jonny cochrane → Johnnie Cochran (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

honestly, i feel like it could refer to both Johnnie Cochran or Johnny Cochrane. Probably even more to the latter since the redirect uses the exact last name. Okmrman (talk) 00:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate with links to both. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for 2 errors (from whichever target is intended). There's no justification for any further disambiguation: both targets have a hatnote. 16:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Shhhnotsoloud (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A disambiguation page consisting of nothing but errors is questionable IMO, especially with only two entries. Since both articles appropriately have hatnotes to each other and the lawyer is ultimately more notable, I'm fine with the status quo. As a second choice, go ahead and redirect it to the football manager—the nominator has a point that at least there's an exact match for the surname. --BDD (talk) 19:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PORTIA[edit]

PORTIA → Thomson Financial#Products (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Although I see PORTIA (in all caps) mentioned here, I think it makes sense to redirect to Portia (disambig page) instead. JuniperChill (talk) 10:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

REtarget to dab page -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 05:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This capitalised redirect is correctly targeted and there's a hatnote to other uses. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SHHH Okmrman (talk) 15:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the current and proposed targets and the creator talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per shhh. mwwv (converse) 14:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor (rapper)[edit]

Doctor (rapper) → Rude boy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target article unclear. Per the edit history trail left by the redirect, the subject of this redirect may have a connection to the subject at Life (Sigma album). Steel1943 (talk) 18:58, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This redirect previously targeted the page now at Rudeboy (Sigma song), where the sole reference (outside of the infobox and citations) to the rapper was that the song was featuring vocals from British singer MC Doctor (permalink). That page was BLARed in Jan 2023 and now targets Life (Sigma album), which - outside of the tracklist - references Doctor once, in the sentence "Rudeboy" featuring Doctor was released as the album's first single on 15 December 2013. (The reason Doctor (rapper) currently targets Rude boy is because the redirect Rudeboy (song) was retargeted to that article not long after a move, causing a bot to retarget this redirect there as well.) All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 22:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom unless page gets updated Okmrman (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-American English[edit]

Pan-American English → North American English (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I just created it but I'm not sure if it's the best idea. I based it on Pan-American Spanish, but English language has no specific article for all the Americas. Or does it have under another name? --MikutoH ^talk! 22:21, 2 May 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) 14:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, cannot find use as one subject, usually "Pan-American" "English school", nothing about a grouping of varieties. Caribbean English is even considered separate, so the article is purely on the US and Canada. So the redirect not necessary nor representative of the article. I cannot find any wider article, under Category:English language in the Americas, possibly one could be made, so a redirect made then. Dank Jae 20:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jhanak[edit]

Jhanak → StarPlus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Redirect with confusing history left over from promotional copy-and-paste moving. A draft of this television show exists at Draft:Jhanak (and has also been created at other titles). Target is one of the networks it has aired on, but has no information on the show at all. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:19, 2 May 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) 14:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Desi (Tibetan)[edit]

Desi (Tibetan) → List of modern political leaders of Tibet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Desi (Tibet) → List of rulers of Tibet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The target doesn't tell me what "Desi" means in the context of Tibet. Is there a better target, or should we delete it if there's no substantive information? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The most substantive information I can find is at Dalai Lama, where the term is used several times and briefly defined once as "regent" or "viceroy." I am not sure that would be a suitable target, however, since the discussion is so brief. It might be better to leave as a redlink or perhaps find a more suitable article where a substantive mention could be added (maybe Ganden Phodrang?). - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Several of the rulers or regents listed at List of rulers of Tibet used the title desi, most notably Changchub Gyaltsen, Sangye Gyatso, and Shatra Wangchuk Gyalpo, but I'm not aware of an exhaustive list. Wikipedia does have an article on the slightly more specific title Druk Desi ("dragon viceroy") formerly used in Bhutan. Maybe we should make one of the redirects into a disambiguation page linking to those notable individuals and Druk Desi?—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 00:44, 7 May 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) 14:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is a disambiguation page feasible?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fictional musical instruments[edit]

Category:Fictional musical instruments → Category:Fictional objects (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Misuse of category redirect. Merged per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_November_14#Category:Fictional_musical_instruments. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 06:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

D-bar operator[edit]

D-bar operator → Complex differential form (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
DBAR operator → DBAR problem (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These should presumably go to the same target (note also ddbar lemma). 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 21:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the

{\bar {\partial }}

operator is somewhat overloaded: the operator might be applied to complex functions in one or several variables, or to complex differential forms. It might be a Dolbeault operator or a Wirtinger derivative, in other words. I think the most helpful target is complex differential form. (Ideally the short section in Cauchy–Riemann equations on the several variables case should also be expanded, but a {{details}} link to complex differential form would anyway be good.) Charles Matthews (talk) 02:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some other relevant pages are Dolbeault cohomology#Dolbeault–Grothendieck lemma and Holomorphic vector bundle#Dolbeault operators. I suspect a disambiguation page may be the best solution. Tazerenix (talk) 04:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate, several operators sharing the same mathematical notation. Ideally, redirect it to a section of the recently made Dbar disambiguation above. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 02:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hisham Saleh[edit]

Hisham Saleh → Mohamed Helmi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The target page for this redirect is about another person. Same applies to Mahmoud Saleh Hisham, which also redirects to the same target page. Ben5218 (talk) 00:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules[edit]

Template:R to sports team[edit]

Template:R to sports team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only used on three redirects and redundant to {{R from member}}. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:25, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:Redirect, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany[edit]

Delete per nom. —Alalch E. 10:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vaibhavrocks2580[edit]

Crude copy-paste of a list or several lists. WP:COPIES Flounder fillet (talk) 10:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Smallet20[edit]

Crude partial copy-paste of Steward Downing with a BLP violation added at the beginning. WP:COPIES Flounder fillet (talk) 10:16, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Calitoz[edit]

Crude copy-paste of Acid sulfate soil. WP:COPIES Flounder fillet (talk) 10:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tricia Andres[edit]

WP:FAKEARTICLE Flounder fillet (talk) 10:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Paige Grimes[edit]

Seems to be a copy from a The Walking Dead wiki or something similar, which makes it at least as bad as WP:COPIES of Wikipedia mainspace articles. Flounder fillet (talk) 09:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This has to be a copyvio, right? Babysharkboss2 was here!! ^{I killed JFK} 14:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But as it’s fixable, it’s not eligible for G12. SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is an "interesting" concept in that this fake article purports to be a biography of the user whose user page it is on. If it were true (if we were in this post-apocalyptic world), it would be an unsourced biography of a living person. But it is something else that still needs deleting. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:January 2018 United States federal government shutdown/Current consensus[edit]

Unused talk subpages. Contains copy pasted template code, but was never filled in with unique content. It's a numbered bulleted list but the bulleted list is blank. Intended for transcluding, but never filled in. Page creator has retired. I thought about G6ing these, should be completely uncontroversial. But better safe than sorry :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kun123z[edit]

Crude copy-paste of an old version of Hockey. WP:COPIES Flounder fillet (talk) 06:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Another stupid redundant fork without the original formatting. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Shrachik agrahari[edit]

Crude copy-paste of an old version of Topology. WP:COPIES Flounder fillet (talk) 06:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There are at least two types of "copy-pastes", ones that are from the wiki markup, and so look like fake articles, and ones that are from the web browser display, and so have lost formatting. The latter are not exactly copies, and are stupid. Maybe we need an essay ridiculing them. This is one of them. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review[edit]

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creation Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Version 1.0 Editorial Team Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and votings	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Voting is not evil Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates