Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut
Purge page cache if page isn't updating.
< July 16 July 18 >

Purge server cache

List of armed conflicts between Bosnia and Serbia[edit]

List of armed conflicts between Bosnia and Serbia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is on the face of it a violation of our policy on improper synthesis, these were wars fought between vastly different entities across different time periods, political systems, etc. Not every battle of e.g. the Ottoman Empire that had been located in or near Bosnia constitutes a "battle of Bosnia + adversary", because the term "Bosnia" (or indeed adversary, Serbia) is used as if it was a coherent entity at the time, which it typically wasn't, as it was usually an occupation or a vasselage situation of some kind. I don't know if it can be rewritten to be actually fine, and I frankly do not trust the quote-less referencing from the newbie user that I already had to warn about sourcing at User talk:Vedib#Introduction to contentious topics. It was passed through AfC but it shouldn't survive AfD as is. Joy (talk) 12:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Lists, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia. Joy (talk) 12:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I should also note that the claims the list captions make are sometimes downright bizarre. Like Ottoman-Bosnian victory and Bosniak population in Podrinje massacred under First Serbian Uprising - this is both casually dismissing elementary facts of the situation, that these conflicts were between the Ottoman Empire and its subjects at the time, definitely not just Bosnia and Serbia as such; and it's making a point of listing massacres in some sort of a grief porn kind of way. It's really below the standard of an encyclopedia. --Joy (talk) 12:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the article in its current form is extremely problematic; Siege of Belgrade (1521) is not a "conflict between Bosnia and Serbia". The nom's concerns would still apply even if only entries like War of Hum were included. It should not have been accepted at AFC, but I see no need to draftify it now. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete . uf, there are all sorts of apples and oranges in this hodgepodge! (Shouldn't, say, Serbs of Bosnia rebelling against Ottomans be Bosnians fighting Ottomans, etc.?)--౪ Santa ౪99° 08:42, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional keep. If the author of the article can write and source the article with the changes I list below (I welcome critiques and suggestions from the opposers @Joy, @Santasa99):
  • Bosnian War. The only point during the war during which an entity formally referred to in English as "Serbia" (shortened form) was in a state of war with an entity formally referred to as "Bosnia" (shortened form) was in April–May 1992 when the Socialist Republic of Serbia, as a constituent of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia or "Yugoslavia" (shortened form) was at war with the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Republika Srpska and Serbian Krajina were sometimes colloquially grouped together with Yugoslavia as "Serbia", but such nomenclature is not standard practice in this encyclopedia. If the author wishes to keep this entry, they are advised to replace "1992–1995" with "1992".
  • World War II in Bosnia & Herzegovina. Territorial control initially shifted from the Kingdom of Yugoslavia to the German Reich and Kingdom of Italy, partly transferred to the Independent State of Croatia (shortened form "Croatia"). at no point was the formal English name for either the Yugoslav government-in-exile or the Yugoslav Army in the Homeland "Serbia", although their political administration eventually included an entity referred to as "Serbia", parallel to to the Banovina of Croatia (shortened form "Croatia"). Beginning with 25 Novemeber 1943, the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (shortened form "Bosnia") was in a state of war with an entity that by that time included an entity "Serbia", so the inclusion of the entry is acceptable. If the author wishes to keep this entry, they are advised to replace "1941–1945" with "1943–1945". A more complex note will be required, complete with references, to explain its inclusion to the reader. Complicated by the fact that the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia also included a "Serbia", meaning "Serbia" was both an enemy and an ally of "Bosnia".
  • Second Serbian Uprising. The Bosnia Eyalet (shortened form "Bosnia") was in a state of war with an entity that already considered itself the Principality of Serbia and was referred to in English as "Serbia" (shortened form), so there can be no objection to its inclusion provided you can source this. However, I would advise striking the sometimes problematic contents of the entire Location column as redundant and (in the case of more expansive wars) too expansive. The same applies to the inlcusion of the First Serbian Uprising, but strike Much of the Bosniak population in Podrinje massacred.
  • Hadži-Prodan's rebellion. Its inclusion is problematic. Yes, it was a "Serbian" uprising, but so was the uprising of 1882 for the most part. Both uprisings featured armies loyal to "Serbia" by that name (in translation), but demonstrating that practically requires the use of primary sources, so they are more appropriate for a "List of armed conflicts between ... and Serbs" type article (see List of Serbian–Ottoman conflicts) than a "List of armed conflicts between ... and Serbia".
A flag of Koča's Serbia used during the Austro-Turkish War of 1788–1791.
  • Austro-Turkish War (1788–1791). It was this conflict that saw the resurgence of "Serbia" as a territorial entity in the first conflict since the death of Jovan Nenad, but it is missing from the list.
  • "Uprising in Herzegovina". Involved an army that mostly desired Austrian rule with a more religious than territorial conception of "Serbia", despite the term's use in a broader sense with undefined borders and administrative structure, making it ineligible for this list.
  • Strike the "Uprising in Drobnjaci", the Siege of Belgrade and the Hungarian-Serbian War from the list.
  • Entries from War of Hum through "Fifth Battle of Srebrenica" needs heavy revision, including additions, merges and clarifications. During this period, both states formally referred to as "Bosnia" and as "Serbia" existed, and conflicts involving both entities in a state of war ought to be included, but only with the appropriate caveats. Part of the issue involves states having rival claims to the title "Serbia"; see List of wars involving Russia for a possible solution.
Ivan (talk) 18:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with all of this is WP:NOR - if no historian would extend the description of e.g. Second Serbian Uprising as an "armed conflict between Bosnia and Serbia", then we can't do that either. By the fact that the term Bosnia isn't even mentioned in that article, it's safe to assume that we're looking at a hard fail here. --Joy (talk) 19:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vedib if you want a source for the inclusion of the First Serbian Uprising:
  • Teinović, Bratislav M. (2020). "Преглед политичког живота у босанском ејалету (1804–1878)" [A review of the political life in the Bosnian eyalet (1804–1878)]. Kultura polisa. 17 (42): 137–154. eISSN 2812-9466. Без сумње, у Босни је почетак рата са Србијом и Црном Гором значио прекретницу у даљим унутрашњим политичким односима. [Without a doubt, in Bosnia the beginning of the war with Serbia and Montenegro marked a turning point in future internal political relations.]
Ivan (talk) 20:17, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that is not a source for a historian, because that seems to be a political science journal and the first Google hit for Bratislav Teinović is Institut za političke studije. We would absolutely not be serving the average English reader well if we try to serve them this in lieu of actual secondary sources relevant to the topic. --Joy (talk) 09:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The journal describes itself as "a peer-reviewed interdisciplinary journal, which publishes original scientific manuscripts on topics from the humanities and social sciences field".[1] The reviewers that year included historians Darko Gavrilović, Davor Pauković, Nebojša Kuzmanović, Vassilis Petsinis and Wolfgang Rohrbach.[2] The website you cited for Teinović is not his primary affiliation, which is the Muzej Republike Srpske (according to that page and elsewhere). An understandable mistake. He received degrees in history from B.A. in 2001 through Ph.D. in 2019 at the University of Banja Luka.[3] But this is just one of a number of sources stating as much. Ivan (talk) 11:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC) Ivan (talk) 11:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I saw he's also associated with a museum - but that's not reassuring at all, because some of the worst scholarly citations I've seen have been in works associated with museums as opposed to other kinds of research institutions. The issue here should still be fairly obvious - this person has 75 mentions on Google Scholar, where someone like Sima Ćirković has 1560. I've linked the policy on original research twice already, here's now a link to WP:RS for more information on identifying reliable sources. --Joy (talk) 12:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a counterclaim from Ćirković, please do provide it, and I will introduce that into the article in parallel. Even then, one would have to cite more than one source to show something is against consensus. Citation counts are a poor metric for determining what is and is not a "RS", especially in a field of study as small as the wartime politics of the Bosnia Eyalet in the early 19th century. Some of the worst scholarly citations I've seen have been in works associated with museums as opposed to other kinds of research institutions. I laugh in agreement, but while Teinović himself is associated with a museum, the work in question was published in a journal published by a university. And some of the best scholarly works I've read have been associated with museums. Especially true for archaeological museums. I wouldn't cite Teinović for 1992 because he was effectively WP:INVOLVED even though his military service did not begin until 1994. But he is one of the few to have defended a doctoral dissertation to encompass the war of 1804–1813.
The worst that could be levied against Teinović is not providing reasoning for what to call the Bosnia Eyalet ("Bosnia") and the new Serbian state ("Serbia"), but the only work I know of offhand that discusses extensively the English terminology for the Serbian state during the First Serbian Uprising is only available in a few libraries currently unavailable to me, so I couldn't quote from it. Although there are many scholarly sources calling Serbia by that name when discussing this time period, as is the case with Bosnia, there are only a few sources discussing the involvement of Bosnia (and especially Sinan Pasha) in the suppression of the uprising. Maybe 10-20 at most. I chose a recent one with a concise statement for quotation purposes, but there are plenty of others you could select to avoid WP:SYNTHESIS.
For an English example that discusses the formal name of Serbia during the revolution with "Karageorge Petrović, supreme commander in Serbia": 115  while also describing "Bosnia" and "Serbia" in conflict:: 125 
Ivan (talk) 16:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See the new "First Serbian Uprising" entry for a rough idea of what my version would look like. Ivan (talk) 17:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, did you just oppose the underpinning of WP:V? :D The burden of proof that something is out there is on the parties trying to introduce this list article. Y'all have to convince everyone else that this would be the encyclopedia describing something from the real world. If all you have is scattered, vaguely relevant mentions of the topic from vaguely relevant sources, that's just not it. The Bataković 2006 citation likewise does not support the case for this list article - yes, there's a sentence that talks of Bosnian beys, but then it also talks of Ottoman rule and the next sentences talk of Ottoman troops and Muslim violence and Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Muslim forces and it goes on and on. If we cherry-picked any one of these appellations and chose to create a list article based on that, it would be absolute madness. --Joy (talk) 06:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am communicating that I can rescue the article, because its subject is something from the real world. An entity known as "Bosnia" has been in conflict with an entity known as "Serbia" on 6 occasions since 1788 and on more still before the death of Pavle Bakić. The Tanzimat reforms removed most of the autonomy the pashas of Bosnia had previously enjoyed, so you could make the case for excluding the Serbian–Ottoman Wars (1876–1878). But even the Serbian Despotate in exile enjoyed considerable military autonomy, to say nothing of the Banate of Bosnia. These were entities that could be punished if they did not answer a call to arms, but were so autonomous that they often did not, and often undertook military campaigns on their own, with little to no involvement of the central authority they answered to.
The relevant portion of the Bataković quotation is in Bosnia that Ottoman rule might be replaced by that of Karageorge’s Serbia, but the preceding part shows that at times it was specifically the Bosnia Eyalet that was in conflict with Revolutionary Serbia. I still need to introduce more sources to help delimit the duration of conflict between those specific entities, but I have already shown that parts of the conflict are indeed described by historians as one between Bosnia and Serbia. And that is the norm rather than the exception for those parts of the conflict. So it is not a redundant duplicate of "List of Serbian–Ottoman conflicts", as "List of conflicts between Devonshire and the Upper Palatinate" would be a redundant duplicate of "List of conflicts between England and Germany".
Your opposition is because the term "Bosnia" (or indeed adversary, Serbia) is used as if it was a coherent entity at the time, which it typically wasn't, as it was usually an occupation or a vasselage situation of some kind. My support is because both "Bosnia" and "Serbia" were usually singular, militarily independent entities even when they were vassals. The Banate of Bosnia was on average even more independent than the Banate of Croatia, yet the latter's ban Pavao Šubić was so powerful he became ban of both entities following his conquest of the latter in 1302, entirely of his own initiative and with hardly any input from the King of Hungary.
Ivan (talk) 12:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Funny that, List of conflicts between England and Germany could have a redundant duplicate - if it existed. It probably doesn't exist because it's not a topic area that attracts so much contrived conflict. If this list is just going to be replicating low-quality nationalist axe-griding from the real world - Wikipedia still shouldn't have to include it, and WP:ARBMAC has a very clear rule against furtherance of outside conflicts. --Joy (talk) 14:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am currently rewriting the article. In a few days, it should be well-sourced. Ivan (talk) 14:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ivan, I am pretty much totally mentally and physically incapacitated with the heat wave we are experiencing around the Adriatic for the last few days. I barely managing to open my laptop and concentrate, and your proposal requires giving some real thought. But, if you think that you can somehow fix it, and if Joy gets on board, I won't oppose. ౪ Santa ౪99° 08:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, thank you. Ivan (talk) 11:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Bosnia and Herzegovina–Serbia relations. Good last point, @Joy. For the most part, "List of wars involving Entity A" is sufficient, otherwise the possible combinations would produce thousands of stub articles. There are a few exceptions, such as List of armed conflicts involving Poland against Russia. But List of armed conflicts between Bosnia and Serbia is shorter and could be relegated to a section within Bosnia and Herzegovina–Serbia relations. Ivan (talk) 17:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • AFC reviewer comment: I accepted this with the understanding that it would probably get sent straight to AfD, on the grounds that the topic is broadly notable and this kind of more specific editorial decision ought to have some kind of consensus rather than just be the decision of a single AfC reviewer, especially since it's an obvious POV magnet. (Judging from the above, I was right.) If it's deleted, I think it's pretty likely that someone will try to create it again, so if this doesn't end as a merge-and-redirect, it's probably worth salting this one. -- asilvering (talk) 22:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. Judging from the above, I was right. Out of curiosity, what POV do you think I represent? Ivan (talk) 11:38, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
References

References

  1. ^ Bjelajac, Željko (n.d.). "About the journal". Kultura polisa.
  2. ^ Bjelajac, Željko (2020). "List of reviewers for the year 2020". Kultura polisa.
  3. ^ Milošević, Borivoje; Branković, Boško; Vasin, Goran; Niković, Nenad (2019-06-20). "Извјештај о оцјени урађене докторске дисертације" (PDF). University of Banja Luka.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be helpful to hear from some new editors about how to consider whether: 1) there is improper original research (current consensus is leaning towards yes) and 2) whether or not deletion or something else is the right remedy if there is improper OR.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Jerabek[edit]

Angela Jerabek (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly written promotional article about an academic not shown to meet WP:NACADEMIC or WP:ANYBIO. The page's sole purpose appears to be to promote an educational model with little peer-reviewed research to back up its efficacy.Blanes tree (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Angela Jerabek just won the James Bryant Conant award, given to one American educator annually in recognition of their contributions to American education. Previous awardees include Thurgood Marshall, Fred Rogers, Claiborne Pell, and Miriam Wright Edelman.
    The American Institutes for Research reviewed the BARR model for three years, across three separate studies funded by the U.S. Department of Education, and found it to improve educational outcomes across numerous measurements. AIR's scale-up study, for example, was an independent review of 21,500 students in 69 schools. Most educational models cannot withstand this level of scrutiny. Among their findings:
    "The BARR approach had substantial and statistically significant impacts on the proportion of students who passed all their core courses."
    "BARR significantly reduced chronic absenteeism."
    "The BARR approach improved teachers’ collaboration with their peers, their data use, and a range of other teacher outcomes."
    Here is the report. Here is the actual PDF report.
    This model was also the only educational model to move through all three stages of federal government review in the I3 program. This article from the widely respected industry publication The Hechinger Report (a publication of the non-profit Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media) outlines the general failure of the 170 educational grantees to meet the program criteria. The one exception: BARR. It names the BARR model as the "poster child" for what the grant was intended to fund.
    The above reading of this article is factually uninformed about how educational models are reviewed and how important the BARR model is nationally at this time. Gtatum (talk) 14:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    KEEP Gtatum (talk) 14:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. I am uncertain about the Conant award. But the NPR piece included in a bunch of refbombing at the bottom [1] appears to be a start towards WP:SIGCOV for a GNG case. I also see a MinnPost article [2] that looks like reasonable coverage. I agree that the article is in somewhat poor shape, although I don't think it's so bad as for WP:TNT. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 14:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect: to the BARR model (which does not have an article). This NPR [3] and sources 16, 17 talk about it, more than about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 01:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The subject is notable for her impact on education, and her work has broad and independent coverage. She got the James Bryant Conant Award, a special honor for educators. She designed the BARR model, which the AIR has hailed as successful. This shows her impact on education through successful federal programs and gives hope for future reform in that field. This award and the impact of her work meet WP:ANYBIO and WP:NACADEMIC. --AstridMitch (talk) 01:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Bro[edit]

Dr. Bro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I had double thoughts before finally agreeing that the notability of this article is very questionable. Firstly having many subscribers or views on YouTube doesnt credibly means the article is notable. There is nothing whatsoever credible about this article. There are some promotional contents in the article. For me, it doesnt meet WP:GNG, and such, I may decline in an AFC review. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heung Kong Group[edit]

Heung Kong Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unremarkable company UKWikiGuy (talk) 15:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nations Publications Limited of Malawi[edit]

Nations Publications Limited of Malawi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or Sng. Tagged by others for this since April. Misses ncorp by far. Zero references other than their own website and I couldn't find any GNG references. North8000 (talk) 19:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacqueline Lovell[edit]

Jacqueline Lovell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage found. She had three supporting roles in Full Moon Features films that have articles, but that does not seem to be enough - especially with no significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 19:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The exact guideline says "Such a person may be considered notable if:", not that they are automatically notable. SL93 (talk) 20:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And she is not automatically notable from three roles in three films when none of the roles received significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 20:36, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But do you allow me to think she is and to !vote according to the applicable guideline? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but do you allow me to voice my thoughts because AfD is not merely just a vote? SL93 (talk) 20:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think your thoughts were pretty clear in your rationale, but feel free, of course. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:41, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete While she does meet WP:NACTOR, I cannot find a single source mentioning her other than movie databases, so she does not pass WP:GNG. Gödel2200 (talk) 20:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Added some sources. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The sources are either not independent (words from co-star, an interview) and trivial coverage. One of the sources says, "This film (along with the aforementioned Hideous!) stars the beautiful Jacqueline Lovell, whose career came to screeching halt shortly after this film." Not only is a sentence not significant coverage but I would say that her career coming to a screeching halt shortly after a B-film speaks towards non-notability. SL93 (talk) 21:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In less than 2 minutes, you've read all the sources added? Wow, I confess I am impressed. Anyway, begging to differ; even if her career as a b-movie star stopped it's sufficiently notable; and anyway again, I've added even more, and more exists, not that it is necessary imv. I disagree with almost everything you said but will leave it at that, thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Why would I need to read the full sources when I just need to use CTRl+F to search for "Jacqueline Lovell"? Why would I need to read full sources to know that something is an interview? Same with knowing that something is just a film database like IMDb and TV.com? SL93 (talk) 21:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources added (by the time of your first reply to me, I will check the new sources now) do not constitute significant coverage. Here is an analysis of them:
  1. [11] Only two passing mentions
  2. [12] This is unreliable per WP:IMDB
  3. [13] This is an interview, so it is not independent
  4. [14] This is a movie summary, and only makes three passing mentions of her
  5. [15] Only one passing mention
  6. [16] Only one passing mention
  7. [17] Only one passing mention
  8. [18] This is a movie, which is not independent of the subject
  9. [19] Only two passing mentions
  10. [20] Again, this is a list of movies, so not significant coverage
  11. [21] This is another movie, which is not independent of the subject
Gödel2200 (talk) 21:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is an analysis of the five new sources added, which still do not constitute significant coverage.
  1. [22] Only two passing mentions
  2. [23] This is an encyclopedia of movies, with only two passing mentions
  3. [24] This source does devote a few sentences to talking about her, but this is only a review of her performance
  4. [25] Only two passing mentions
  5. [26] Only two passing mentions
Gödel2200 (talk) 21:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel D'Lima[edit]

Manuel D'Lima (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under SNG or GNG. None of the sources are about him. Sources (and much of the content) are about taitrs. Material on him is just resume type material. North8000 (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to answer with respect to what you are seeing because there have been 104 edits to the article since I nominated this. But I did evaluate them at the time. North8000 (talk) 18:52, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, a lot was added after you nominated this, including several refs, but much of it was WP:PROMO, fluff, repetition, and stuff about the genre of theatre that, I think, has no direct relevance to D'Lima's career. I tried to reduce the promo, cruft, repetition and tangential stuff, but someone else should review the refs to see if they actually discuss Liima's life or career at all. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to assess new additions to the article since it's nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no review of additions to the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PTV Sports[edit]

PTV Sports (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

References do not show how this is notable. Plenty of unreliable sources and NEWSORGINDIA but nothing in-depth. Recommend a redirect to parent Pakistan Television Corporation. While I did not do so prior to the AfD, programming also needs to be removed per WP:NOTTVGUIDE. It appears that the notability of the page is attempted to be heightened by the mentions of the programs it shows. CNMall41 (talk) 23:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When searching for references, make sure to weed out those that apply to PTV Sports (TV program) as well. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have added more RS.--Ameen Akbar (talk) 21:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These "reliable sources" seem to fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Can you point out the specific ones that show notability?--CNMall41 (talk) 05:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep NEWSORGINDIA cannot possibly apply to this article (and I'm surprised the nom hasn't received blowback for even mentioning that country's name in this nom for a Pakistani subject and network); it has enough sources within to easily pass WP:N and is by default Pakistan's main sports channel. Cull back the programming list to only cricket and soccer as a simple list and source it; that's the only true issue with this article. Nate • (chatter) 00:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment is a little uncivil but I understand your concern as it has been raised several times in the past. NEWSORGINDIA has been applied to the entire subcontinent in both articles and AfD discussions. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Classical mathematics[edit]

Classical mathematics (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is not a thing. It claims to be about "classical mathematics", in distinction to constructivist approaches, but this distinction is actually entirely about classical logic, a topic for which we already have an article and do not need a second one. My WP:BLAR (a redirect to classical logic) was reverted by an anonymous user, un-reverted by CFA, reverted again by the anon, and supported by Викидим, so rather than continuing to edit-war over the redirect we should discuss it. Here is the discussion. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. The term is much broader than just foundations of mathematics
  2. There are plenty of sources discussing the classical mathematics
  3. It has little to do with the Classical logic
A merge into the Foundations of mathematics can be considered. --Викидим (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adventures of Ricky Deen[edit]

Adventures of Ricky Deen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not have WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:NF BOVINEBOY2008 21:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gene Pool (software)[edit]

Gene Pool (software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP: N -- I can't find any sources that would establish notability. The creator of the article dePRODed this without any sourcing improvements. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zahir Vasquez[edit]

Zahir Vasquez (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough coverage of this American soccer player to meet WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 GT World Challenge Australia[edit]

2025 GT World Challenge Australia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete per WP:TOOSOON. Or possibly redirect to Australian GT Championship as an ATD. CycloneYoris talk! 20:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Pierce (musician)[edit]

John Pierce (musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG, coverage of Pierce in secondary sources is entirely lacking. Editors with access to offline music magazine archives may have better luck finding sources, but the total absence of anything more substantial than an interview or liner notes does not suggest to me that we should presume such coverage exists. As Pierce has worked with several bands, I don't think there is any single redirect target that would be appropriate, and that internal search results thus best serve readers searching for this title. signed, Rosguill talk 17:19, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HarmonyOS kernel[edit]

HarmonyOS kernel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails WP:GNG, WP:NPRODUCT -- the HarmonyOS Kernel has not received WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS. Available coverage does not support standalone notability as WP:USERGENERATED (blogs, Hackernoon, Github, etc.), WP:PRIMARYSOURCES, WP:TRADES, or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS in coverage of HarmonyOS NEXT. I attempted to redirect to HarmonyOS NEXT, but that was reverted; bringing it here with a recommendation to merge but open to other outcomes as well. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:28, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think HarmonyOS Kernel deserves its own page as it's really important in Huawei's HarmonyOS next. XeVierTech (talk) 16:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Last vehicle board[edit]

Last vehicle board (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to meet WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 18:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Radical chrétien[edit]

Radical chrétien (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG: The only candidate who used the "radical Christian" label is Rousseau, and contemporary coverage about him is not significant. Newspaper coverage shows that the three candidates in 1967 actually represented the Ralliement des créditistes, with the label "Créditiste". Helpful Raccoon (talk) 20:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aquebogue Windmill[edit]

Aquebogue Windmill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable replica structure written in non-encyclopedic promotional tone. Fails the test of multiple secondary, independent, reliable sources. (The Bob Liepa article is the same article published in three different places, the Dempsey article does not mention this windmill at all, and the KDHamptons article is ineligible as tabloid coverage.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:53, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by Geo Entertainment[edit]

List of programs broadcast by Geo Entertainment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another one that fails WP:NLIST. I removed everything that does not have a reference or a Wikipedia page and there are only three current original programs. Everything else falls under WP:NOTTVGUIDE. I did a WP:BEFORE in an attempt to find sourcing that talks about their programming as a whole and was unable to find anything reliable. I recommend a redirect of the name and maybe include the three current programs on the main Geo Entertainment page as an WP:ATD. CNMall41 (talk) 22:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kade Ferris[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Kade Ferris (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I believe this article should be deleted because it clearly fails WP:NOTE. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 11:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Archaeology. Shellwood (talk) 11:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The cited sources are a bit thin but I wouldn't say it's 'clear' either way. Did you look for sources? The article lists several books authored by the subject, did you look for reviews per WP:NAUTHOR? – Joe (talk) 13:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah I can't find anything to meet the Wikipedia notability guidelines. I still stand by deleting this article. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope this article fails notability guidelines for authors too. It seems this page was made by friends of the article's subject. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:12, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What makes you think it was made by friends of the subject? Belbury (talk) 08:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. His books appear to be self-published but that would be ok if there were reliably published reviews of them. I couldn't find any. The sources in the article now include a book review, but of someone else's book and mentioning Ferris only in passing. The only in-depth source that we have is a local-news obituary, appearing to be a family-written obituary rather than a work of independent journalism. That's not enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @David Eppstein Kade Ferris is the author. Charles Albert Bender = Chief Bender and is the subject of the biography. There are other reviews of that book too. Anyway I'm leaning keep. Cielquiparle (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Chief Bender meets notability guidelines for his sports career while Ferris does not meet any Wikipedia notability guidelines. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 00:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you telling me that the book Métis and the Medicine Line: Creating a Border and Dividing a People, with the author listed as Michel Hogue on the cover, is really by Kade Ferris? Because that is the book whose review I was referring to. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @David Eppstein Right. I clocked that the first time I read your comment, but the second time I read it, I read it the other way. I can add the other book reviews (of his book) and also quote from at least one other book I found. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This article still seems to fail WP:NTEMP and WP:SUSTAINED OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Minnesota, and North Dakota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I see that the review in American Indian Children's Literature got removed from the article as a source. I am adding it back. While the site itself could be construed as a blog, the reason this particular blog qualifies as a reliable source per WP:BLOGS, is that it is produced by Debbie Reese, who is an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I expanded it to include more about the impact of his tribal history preservation work and the impact that has on reservations, ND and MN educational standards and added information about his mapping skills.  oncamera  (talk page) 08:59, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I still don't see how this article ceases to fail WP:NOTE WP:NTEMP and WP:SUSTAINED. OldDiddlyBop (talk) 16:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    His written work as an author and oral traditions that he embedded within his maps, blogs, and recorded videos for the state of North Dakota established notability. He was a respected tribal historian and elder knowledge keeper and professional work reflects that.  oncamera  (talk page) 21:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The article has now been puffed up with some 30 footnotes, most of which do not seem to be the sort of in-depth independent and reliably-published coverage of the subject that could be used to pass WP:GNG. Of the ones that actually mention Ferris or his works in their title, "Kade Ferris's Gift" is an interview (not usually counted as independent), the Red Lake Nation News obituary reads like a family-written obituary (not independent), the Mendoza book review is in a blog (not reliably published), Teachings of Our Elders is by him not about him, and Archaeologist presents has no depth of coverage of Ferris. Perhaps, per WP:THREE, advocates of keeping the article could save us the effort of similarly evaluating all 30 of the footnotes and point us to three sources that are actually in-depth, independent, and reliably-published? I'm looking for a small number of high-quality sources, at most three, not many low-quality sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that it would be helpful to hear the three best sources. It seems like notability is marginal at best and it's hard to see through all the passing coverage. – Joe (talk) 08:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep. This article was already extremely well cited, but I added an infobox and a little bit more. His notability stems from his tribal historic preservation work which is interdisciplinary (history, anthropology, archaeology, policy making, language advocacy, etc.) Yuchitown (talk) 16:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you please address the discussion above about lack of high-quality sourcing, rather than merely asserting that "This article was already extremely well cited" when clearly it isn't? It has many sources but that misses the point. We need a small number of high-quality sources, and continuing to add larger numbers of low-quality sources only makes notability harder to discern by hiding the good sources in a big pile of dross. It would be better to remove both the low-quality sources and the material sourced to them so that we can focus on the essentials. The sources you added (his own dissertation and a web page about someone else that mentions him in passing) do not contribute to notability according to Wikipedia's standards for notability, which are not based on the work the subject might have done but rather on the depth of coverage of the subject in sources that are independent of him and meet Wikipedia's standards for reliable publication. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't appreciate the suggestion that tribal newspapers are "low-quality sources." Like I wrote, his notability is based on being a THPO, so it's interdisciplinary. He was not just a writer. While several pieces (Red Lake Nation News, Minnesota Native News) focus on him specifically, even if these didn't exist, Wikipedia:Notability (people) states: If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. He has contributed "part of the enduring historical record" of the Métis people. Yuchitown (talk) 02:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Tribal newspapers are as reliable as any other newspaper. But when a local newspaper (tribal or not) runs an obituary that reads like the sort of obituary written by a family member to announce a death, rather than the kind of obituary that major newspapers write themselves when famous people die, it doesn't count much towards notability. For one thing, if it is indeed written by family, it is not an independent source. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    .... even if these didn't exist, Wikipedia:Notability (people) states: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability". He has contributed "part of the enduring historical record" of the Métis people. Yuchitown (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So much a part of the enduring historical record that the only Wikilink to him from any other article is a an unsourced sentence about him in an article about a village in Lebanon, stating that he is also of Lebanese descent, something that appears nowhere in the Kade Ferris article itself? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If that's an issue to you, you can help expand topics on Turtle Mountain, the Ojibwe or Metis history and credit/wikilink his article from those edits. Wikipedia needs more editors in that area.  oncamera  (talk page) 10:27, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I definitely think the Métis have an interesting history that deserves to be better-known, but I have no special expertise in that area, and I have even less knowledge of Turtle Mountain or the Ojibwe.
Incidentally, I can find no evidence that Kade Ferris had any connection to Lebanon, outside of a few unreliable web sources. I have removed the link to him from the Lebanese village article. His mother was from Minnesota and his father was originally from the Turtle Mountain Reservation. I suspect his father, Albert Ferris, may have some notability as an artist. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I just came across this AfD and don't entirely feel experienced enough with guidelines to vote either way, but I'd like to note that Ferris' work on map decolonization and geographic technologies (as THPO for the Red Lake Nation) was significant enough that he gave a full-fledged presentation at the Council for Minnesota Archaeology's 2023 annual conference, entitled "Creating a Virtual Database for Regional Tribal Resource Management and Consultation". I don't know if, for example, a program (with an abstract of his talk) from the conference (the most important one on Minnesota archaeology, as far as I know) would count towards GNG, but I do have such a document if uploading it somewhere could prove useful. Thanks. SunTunnels (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think that giving a lecture or presentation at a conference is a stand-out event. Doing that is an ordinary part of an academic's job. The only exceptions would be instances where being selected to give the lecture is itself a high honor, like when a national academic society invites someone to do the Annual So-and-so Memorial Lecture. That can be an indication that the field regards the person's work as particularly important. XOR'easter (talk) 21:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please address the question of notability per cited sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recheck the article. It's completely fine now. Yuchitown (talk) 03:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
False. There are still zero WP:GNG-contributing sources: sources that provide in-depth content about Ferris, are written independently of their subjects, and are reliably published. None of the previous keep comments have even attempted to address those requirements of GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Kade Ferris was a distinguished archaeologist, anthropologist and historian, one of the first Indigenous archaeologists in the U.S. I've made some improvements, including adding a book review and an obit in an academic journal. He clearly meets criterion #2 of WP:ANYBIO, WP:BASIC and also nows meet GNG. As an aside, I find it really quite odd that the nominator would assume that It seems this page was made by friends of the article's subject especially given the fact that such a new editor, with only 40 total edits (the majority of which were to the article or this AfD) would make such a comment. I guess I'm also a little curious how they learned by their 20th edit how to produce an AfD so quickly. Nominator, do you yourself have a connection to the subject of the article and why would you make such a statement? Netherzone (talk) 17:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding "Strong" in front of your !vote, or casting aspersions at the nom, will not give your view more weight. Highlighting sources that provide WP:SIGCOV will.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drunvalo Melchizedek[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Drunvalo Melchizedek (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It's regrettable that this page has remained on Wikipedia for so long. It relies exclusively on primary sources and blog posts. Drunvalo Melchizedek lacks significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. There are no serious reviews of his self published books. Consensus was deletion after a previous nomination in 2012. Not much has changed. He might be well known in New Age pseudoscience circles but there is nothing of substance for a Wikipedia page. Ynsfial (talk) 19:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well Hung Heart[edit]

Well Hung Heart (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. I can find plenty of reviews, but they're on blogs. toweli (talk) 18:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Specific humidity capacity[edit]

Specific humidity capacity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed during NPP. Appears to be just seeking to create/post a neologism for certain aspects of existing thermodynamic principles. A search revealed only two hits on the term, both twitter posts by the same person who is an author of a paper which is the only reference for this article. North8000 (talk) 18:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Electoral history of Billy Hughes[edit]

Electoral history of Billy Hughes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE/WP:NOTSTATS - not really clear what purpose this page is serving. It's a series of transclusions (mostly unsourced) from pre-existing results pages. Have read a few biographies of Hughes and as far as I'm aware no one has analysed his electoral record as a discrete "topic". I T B F 💬 17:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He was Australia's longest-serving federal MP, eight different parties including multiple leadership elections (all of which well documented) Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CoreHW[edit]

CoreHW (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wP:notability under GNG or SNG. Of the 11 references, 8 are their own websites, and 2 are brief database type listings. That leaves only 1 possible GNG reference (#5 per 7/7/24 numbers) and it's behind a paywall. (A paywall does not preclude it from consideration, it just means that I was unable to review but a best it would mean only one) Wording follows this pattern, sounds like only self-description.

North8000 (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Elliott (politician)[edit]

Glenn Elliott (politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable local official and U.S. Senate candidate. All sources cited on the page are WP:ROTM coverage of his mayorship and Senate campaign. No real in-depth coverage of him as a person, and no indication that either his campaign or mayoral administration were considered especially notable by media outlets. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Microplastic Consumer: Wheeling has a population under 30,000. The fact that it happens to be one of the largest cities in WV is irrelevant, being the mayor of a relatively small community does not establish notability. Please familiarize yourself with WP:NPOL. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Progressive Democrats of America[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Progressive Democrats of America (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Most articles cited on this page are either pages from PDA's own website or articles about its founder. I can't find anything much better on Google; most coverage of PDA is passing mentions of it, usually when PDA teams up with a bunch of other progressive groups to release a "__ progressive groups call for __"-type press release. Previously nominated for deletion 18 years ago; I think it's time to reassess. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mauro Calderón[edit]

Mauro Calderón (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Discography directly copied from Draft:Mauro Calderón, which was moved to draft due to having no sources and being promotional/reading like an ad, and later recreated as an article with no improvements (arguably even less of an improvement) as there is nothing about his life at all here. All links are just to YouTube videos of the songs, which do not establish notability. Procyon117 (talk) 17:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iyowa[edit]

Iyowa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Checked through the sources, don't think this meets WP:COMPOSER. Although one of my favorite producers, he fails notability sadly. btw, heat abnormal is a banger. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 17:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sea Switch[edit]

Sea Switch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBOOK. Skipping PROD due to article length. -1ctinus📝🗨 16:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Hampton, Virginia, mayoral election[edit]

2016 Hampton, Virginia, mayoral election (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NEVENT and WP:GNG for lacking significant coverage. Wikipedia is not a political database. -1ctinus📝🗨 16:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Donnie Tuck[edit]

Donnie Tuck (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails both WP:GNG and WP:NPOL, as all coverage is WP:MILL, and he is a local politician. Wikipedia is not a politics database. I am also nominating George E. Wallace (Virginia politician) for the same reason, as the former mayor of the same city. -1ctinus📝🗨 15:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EGM Green[edit]

AfDs for this article:
EGM Green (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Third time's a charm, I hope. This company has somehow survived two AfDs despite failing the notability guidelines for companies. The available sources are thinly-veiled press releases, not providing genuinely independent coverage. – Teratix ₵ 13:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that the sources are not very reliable and they (including the article itself) all seem like a big advetisement. Have you found any good sources anywhere that are reliable? Because I don't believe this exactly needs to be deleted, but it might be able to be improved. Coulomb1 (talk) 14:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a thorough look in all the usual places you'd expect to find sources on this sort of company and found no decent sources. They're all either associated with the company or regurgitating its press releases. – Teratix ₵ 14:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I think a delete is a viable option. Everything about this corporation is a big ad. Coulomb1 (talk) 14:23, 11 July 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 13:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Press releases pop up about once every 5-6 years in the card gaming press. Not enough business traction for notability. MNewnham (talk)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Thomas Lockley[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Thomas Lockley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem to pass GNG or even SNG. His work may be notable, he is not. Slatersteven (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually should have CSD'd as its been deleted before. Slatersteven (talk) 13:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first deletion seems to have happened 6 years ago, back when his Yasuke book was yet to reach the other side of the pond. He and his work have since become much more notable since then, for better or worse. It's better we keep this page for that reason alone. --Jnglmpera (talk) 13:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montreux Healthcare Fund[edit]

Montreux Healthcare Fund (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. No in-depth significant coverage about the fund itself. Imcdc Contact 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

De'Anyers family[edit]

De'Anyers family (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTGENEALOGY. I don't think any reliable sources cited or available elsewhere provide significant coverage of the article subject, instead providing lots of tangential mentions that do not by themselves confer notability. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ghana National Film Authority[edit]

Ghana National Film Authority (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Insufficient references. At least three references about the main subject must all meet WP:SIRS. I don't see any that do. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Liška[edit]

Martin Liška (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to Slovakia at the 2004 Summer Olympics as ATD because I could not find any in-depth coverage of this athlete to meet WP:GNG.

This AfD might be exactly the same issue as with Peter Kondrát I nominated back in January under my old username (CuteDolphin712). Since Martin Liška was born in Brno, Czech Republic, but represents Slovakia, I don't know which language of source is primary.

  • The only decent site I found in Slovak language is SME but it looks nowhere near significant.
  • Oddly enough, Czech media IDNES (2016, 2018, 2022) and Czech Television have articles of a horseback rider of the same name. However, the first source by IDNES tells said jockey turned 39 thus clearly not the same men as this cyclist. Without evidence of cyclist Liška being a horse jockey in his hometown, this case fails WP:V.

⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hiten Dharpure[edit]

Hiten Dharpure (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Dharpure has achieved a couple of obscure records recognized by the "India Book of Records" and the "Worldwide Book of Records", neither publication notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles. Given the number of newspaper clippings posted by the article's author at Commons (now mostly nominated for deletion as copyright violations), it is likely that this is an autobiography. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No notability and blatantly COI. Procyon117 (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indians in Luxembourg[edit]

Indians in Luxembourg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG, 2 of the 3 sources are dead. The estimated population is very small at around 1000, and no significant coverage of their contribution to Luxembourg society. LibStar (talk) 06:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should consider renaming this to the Indian Association of Luxembourg.
There appears to be significant sourcing for that at least.
[35] [36] [37] Bluethricecreamman (talk) 03:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
K added a few sources, but still not convinced its quite notable. This article still has massive amounts of texts that are unsourced. As far as I can tell, its mostly been anon IPs adding random bits of info. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 04:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If nobody else can find useful sourcing, i'll vote Delete Bluethricecreamman (talk) 06:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 02:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BLEND[edit]

AfDs for this article:
BLEND (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article doesn't show notability, and a WP:BEFORE search didn't find anything that would meet WP:ORGCRIT. It's all routine announcements and trivial coverage, mainly in press releases. bonadea contributions talk 10:40, 10 July 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 11:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 23:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mosab Al Khateeb[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Mosab Al Khateeb (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Moved from WP:AFC after decline, fails WP:NSINGER. Theroadislong (talk) 08:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this Wikipedia is about a Jordanian singer who enjoys wide fame in the Arab world and is alive. I ask you to approve this Wikipedia and not delete it. It will be amended and more will be added over time from reliable sources. Thank you. Mohdkhatttab (talk) 08:26, 14 July 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 11:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

IGN Convention[edit]

IGN Convention (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NEVENTS, only lists 10 sources, half of them are YouTube. The notability tag was put in 10 years ago, no fix till now. MK at your service. 11:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magik[edit]

Magik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This character was recently moved to primary topic despite her notability being extremely weak. The majority of reception is from content farm-related sites such as ScreenRant that don't really distinguish between major and incredibly minor comic book characters. At least in the Video Game WikiProject, we consider Looper/CBR unreliable and ScreenRant inadmissible, leaving almost no reception that passes GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2022 NRL pre-season results[edit]

2022 NRL pre-season results (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I want to propose that the 2022 NRL pre-season results be redirected to National Rugby League#Pre-season or deleted, in addition to the 2023 NRL pre-season results and 2024 NRL pre-season results articles being renamed to 2023 NRL Pre-season Challenge and 2024 NRL Pre-season Challenge respectively. A collection of independently organised friendlies grouped on to one page is a trivial list and the information is better suited on the "2022 [team] season" pages. As for 2023 and 2024, these were organised by the NRL and the title of those pages should reflect the official name "Pre-season Challenge".

I understand muti page move would have likely been a better format for this discussion, however the template did not seem to function properly. Mn1548 (talk) 10:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An alternative could be to merge/redirect to 2022 NRL season#Pre-season, adding details from the background but not the fixtures section. There are only four NRL teams without 2022 season articles, Raiders, Roosters, Tigers, and Warriors, so all the matches apart from 2 (Roosters against Raiders and Tigers) are covered by these articles. EdwardUK (talk) 13:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a more appropriate redirect, thanks. Mn1548 (talk) 14:41, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ravindra Lakmal[edit]

Ravindra Lakmal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Although subject may be covered by WP:NCRICKET (Additionally, cricketers who have played at the highest domestic level [...] may have sufficient coverage about them to justify an article, but it should not be assumed to exist without further proof), with a single appearance for a club side more than 20 years ago, there is no indication the subject has received significant coverage to pass the general notability guideline. C679 10:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hewage Jayaweera (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) C679 10:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - either one article is the problem or thousands. And if we isolate individual articles - in both English and non-English speaking countries - this does nothing to solve the problem we've landed ourselves in. Bobo. 17:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Martinair Cargo destinations[edit]

List of Martinair Cargo destinations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOT, , WP:NCORP, and what I'm going to call the "you're joking, right?" test.

Let's take the last of those first: this is a cargo airline. Realistically they're going to fly where ever you pay enough money to send things to. Moreover this is overwhelmingly a list of places where this airline does not fly to, since most of the destinations are listed as "terminated". You're joking, right?

The WP:NOT failure is very clear: this is an exhaustive listing of company services and so fails under WP:NOTCATALOG no. 6 which states that "Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services". It's also a listing of all services this company offered and so is indiscriminate information under WP:IINFO. I could go on with the WP:NOT failures (original research is a big one BTW) but it would be tiresome.

The WP:NCORP failures are also easily described: there is no evidence at all that a listing of all of the services offered by a cargo company as of April 2020 (or ever, actually) is a notable topic that should be covered in an encyclopaedia. None of the sources in the article meet WP:ORGIND because they all are ultimately sourced solely to the company and are coverage in local/industry press. Taking them one-by-one:

  1. The MartinAir website (which actually doesn't have the information it is used to cite...)
  2. The Best Travelstore website - a travel agent.
  3. A 404 link to a page on the Hong Kong Department of Trade and Commerce.
  4. A 404 link to a page on the website of the Journal of Commerce.

Even as a WP:SPLITLIST this page has to have stand-along notability per WP:AVOIDSPLIT which this clearly does not. FOARP (talk) 09:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Cargo routes get substantially less interest than passenger routes so I don't think this needs a standalone article or one structured with this kind of table, but Martinair#Destinations should still provide information about the airline's services. However per my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Vietnam Airlines destinations, this does not violates NOT: it is a narrow, discriminate topic without inappropriate detail; it is not "A resource for conducting business" and so the straightforward listing is not a forbidden catalogue; the fact that it's poorly sourced does not make it original research – no one did their own unverifiable analysis of anything. Reywas92Talk 14:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Our coverage does not depend on whether a topic is popular or not. Which services that are sourced in the article do you think should be merged? The vast majority of the services that the airline actually operates are not sourced at all, I don't see any reliably-sourced content here that can be merged that is not already in the main article about the airline.
    Is it verifiable that the services were operated and then "Terminated"? No. Linking to this source and saying that the destinations are now "terminated" is pure OR. As is saying that the services are being operated based on a bare link to this page - you can't see that ANY of these services are actually being run based on that page.
    In what way is listing every destination the airline ever flew to discriminate? FOARP (talk) 15:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Linking previous nominations involving this page:
–24 October 2015– Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pages in Category:Lists of airline destinations;
–26 March 2024– Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British Airways destinations. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per nom. It would be good to have the current destinations in the parent article.Reywas92, if you can pull this off from reliable and current sources: just copy and paste what is left of the destinations. gidonb (talk) 00:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of European Air Charter destinations[edit]

List of European Air Charter destinations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Clear failure of WP:NOT, WP:NCORP, and plain old common-sense.

Starting with common-sense first: this is, as the name of the airline clearly states, a charter airline - it will fly to whereever you charter it to fly to so long as you pay enough. The destinations it serves are literally the whole world.

Moving on to WP:NOT, this is clearly an exhaustive list of company services and so is failed under WP:NOTCATALOG no. 6 which states that "Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services". This is a straight forward listing of all the services that this airline possible offered at some point, which makes it indiscriminate information excluded under WP:IINFO. I could also throw in WP:PROMO, WP:NOTGUIDE, and a bunch of other headings that this fails under.

WP:NCORP is failed because there is no evidence at all that the services offered by European Air Charter are a notable topic based on reliable, independent, third-party sources that would meet WP:ORGIND. Only one source is cited in the article - the company website - and in reality any other source is going to be industry/local press coverage based on press-reports and company statements.

Even if this is considered a WP:SPLITLIST of the European Air Charter page, it still has to meet the requirements for a stand-alone page per WP:AVOIDSPLIT, which this page manifestly does not. And again, a charter airline does not have fixed destinations so what is the point of this listing anyway? FOARP (talk) 08:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

–26 March 2024– Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British Airways destinations. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sta-Prest[edit]

Sta-Prest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Sta-Prest does not seem to be notable enough in and of itself to justify a standalone article. Notability seems to largely come from the fact that it's a product of a notable company, Levi Strauss & Co, rather than being a notable product DeputyBeagle (talk) 08:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keemokazi[edit]

Keemokazi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing here to meet WP:GNG. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Midwest Rugby League[edit]

Midwest Rugby League (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article has minimal sources and said sources only talk about exhibition games ahead of planed launches of the competition. Google search only bring up the Wikipedia page, Facebook page, and USARL Page which has nothing on it. Fails WP:GNG. Mn1548 (talk) 11:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dokibird[edit]

Dokibird (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All the coverage in the article is from February 2024 when she left the entertainment company Nijisanji. Beyond that, I've found two reliable sources that do not cover this topic (Siliconera 1, Siliconera 2). Wikipedia's notability criteria discourages articles on people notable for only one event, which this article seems to cover. Most of the content featured in the article also seems to be a content fork of the article Nijisanji. I suggest deleting the article or turning it into a redirect to the Nijisanji article. ArcticSeeress (talk) 08:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kris McLaren[edit]

Kris McLaren (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. C679 07:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TV9 Kannada[edit]

AfDs for this article:
TV9 Kannada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced article. Literary found nothing that can help to support WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 07:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TV9 Bangla[edit]

TV9 Bangla (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only press releases. Literary found nothing that can help to support WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 07:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TV9 Gujarati[edit]

TV9 Gujarati (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced article. Literary found nothing that can help to support WP:GNG. Twinkle1990 (talk) 07:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Coliseum (West Georgia)[edit]

AfDs for this article:
The Coliseum (West Georgia) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
  • Delete: The page is a very short stub. While it does have a full table, there is nowhere near enough information on the page due to the lack of history and, presumably, lack of coverage on the construction and events at the venue. I actually considered constructing a Wikipedia article for The Coliseum back in November 2023, but I chose Halenbeck Hall instead due to the former's lack of resources. Centennial Center (Georgia College & State) would have certainly been a better choice for making a Wikipedia article. Wjenkins96 (talk)

Alex Guerrero (lineman)[edit]

Alex Guerrero (lineman) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. - Although subject may meet WP:NGRIDIRON as stated in the last AfD (2011), this does not establish sufficient notability. C679 06:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who's That Girl (upcoming film)[edit]

Who's That Girl (upcoming film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:TOOSOON, this film should not have an article yet. This article has been draftified by KingArti twice despite the guidelines at WP:DRAFTIFY, and the draftification has been reverted. GTrang (talk) 04:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keiichi Misawa[edit]

Keiichi Misawa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Previously deleted by PROD. C679 03:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thriller (Fall Out Boy song)[edit]

Thriller (Fall Out Boy song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is based on album reviews for Infinity on High. so it doesn't establish a separate WP:SIGCOV. I searched sources independently and I found two, both from NME,[45][46] one written from Patrick Stump's point of view and the other from Pete Wentz's view. Those sources don't say anything different from what is already said by the sources present in the article. And Infinity on High mentions part of the article's content anyway. (CC) Tbhotch™ 03:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Infinity on High: sources in article only make very brief mentions of the song, and the same goes for the two NME articles the nominator linked. Nowhere near enough for an independent article. I wouldn't oppose a merger if there are any valuable statements included here which aren't already in the album article. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 03:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge (into Infinity on High) - it has good info, but I agree with the nom. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 06:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I came here from DYK and I am the editor who approved this article's nomination when it ran on the main page. During the approval process many editors, administrators and readers vetted the article. The article clearly meets our general notability guide. A topic is "notable" if there is enough usable coverage of it in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, to write a good encyclopedic article. I think that is what we have here, a good encyclopedic article about the song, based on multiple secondary sources. Lightburst (talk) 01:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You can refer to WP:NSONGS: "Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability." (CC) Tbhotch™ 03:47, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should not focus on the SNG - WP:NSONG, according to WP:N A topic is presumed to merit an article if: It meets either the general notability guideline (GNG) below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific notability guideline (SNG); and t is not excluded under the What Wikipedia is not policy. I believe that it meets GNG based on the RS. Lightburst (talk) 04:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, they are not a reason to keep the page alone. Some sources are trivial and none of the sources present is about the song alone; they are about the album, regardless on how you'd like to word it. As I said before, just because the sources at Infinity on High#References mention songs like Don't You Know Who I Think I Am?, I've Got All This Ringing in My Ears and None on My Fingers, or Bang the Doldrums, we have to create their articles based on album reviews that trivially reviewed them from the album's perspective, like it occured with Thriller (Fall Out Boy song).
On the talk page I left the sources review. I don't see the independent, non-trivial, non-passing mentions content that indicate significant coverage that is independent from the parent album. I see sources speaking about the song from the album's context focusing on being named after a Michael Jackson album and inadvertently having a rap intro by Jay-Z, both facts that can be covered by the album's composition section.
As much as you'd like to keep the page, this hadn't had to run on the main page in the first place and you made a mistake by approving an article built on trivialities. Proof of this is the fact that this song hasn't been discussed by critics in subsequent releases thoroughly and it needs to have a background that doesn't even mention the song and has to rely exclusively on trivial album mentions. (CC) Tbhotch™ 04:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have made seven edits to the article and you have typed 6527 characters (1062 words) in an effort to remove an article that is only 2963 characters (517 words). This AfD time-suck is an example of why I am not as active in deletion lately. You have lost credibility in your source assessment because I randomly looked at #9: you referred to three full paragraphs discussing the song as a passing mention. And #15 you refer to an article which features this song as one of 15 heaviest songs as a passing mention. I am not going to focus on all the WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments. Also I really need to start observing WP:COAL and maybe you should too. Lightburst (talk) 19:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinion divided between Keeping this article and Merge/Redirect it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, hopefully we can see more participation to come to a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fiona Krautil[edit]

Fiona Krautil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't see how she meets WP:BIO or WP:AUTHOR. Most of the sources merely confirm facts about her and I found nothing in a google news search. LibStar (talk) 02:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have already added more references to this article to show notability. She has been written about in the Australian press with some brief bios in those articles. She advised the Federal Government and argued for innovative labour policies for women long before they were legislated by government such as paid maternity leave, flexible working hours, better access to child care. I will add more to her article later.LPascal (talk) 06:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment- Also she has brief bios in Who's Who in Australia 2002 and 2009 and is listed in the Encyclopedia of Australian Science and Innovation https://www.eoas.info/biogs/P004276b.htm LPascal (talk) 06:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Iloski[edit]

Eric Iloski (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find enough independent coverage of this American soccer player to meet WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Driver[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Chris Driver (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. 2 sources provided are primary. Found nothing searching ["Chris Driver" mauritius -wikipedia] LibStar (talk) 01:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Burr dilemma[edit]

Burr dilemma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable enough. The page seems to have only one or two citations to a pair of closely-related papers by the same author, both mostly speculative. Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 01:38, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it can be merged with a related article. --Erel Segal (talk) 15:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that a brief mention could be added to bullet voting. Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 04:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please identify an existing target article when proposing a Merge or Redirect or your argument will be pretty much dismissed as it can't be realized.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep I checked through the first dozen articles listed as citing the relevant study [47], and about half of those contain a statement of the type "Nagel (2007) refers to this as the Burr dilemma" or "Nagel offers a critique of this type of voting by [minimal summary]". That is not exactly grand notability but I think it suffices to show a certain amount of uptake and acknowledgement in the field. A merge would certainly work as well though. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Again, if you are seeking a Merge, you have to identify an existing target article. It's not the job of a closer to make a judgment of which article is most suitable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strategic_voting#Influence_of_voting_method might work as a merge target, if merged. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete there are additional citations, yes, but they're very limited (the link above only has 25 results, of which 2 are the main academic articles, and include other irrelevant topics), and don't provide any additional secondary discussion of the original articles. It's basically a non-notable neologism. SportingFlyer T·C 10:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't have any problem if this is mentioned in another article, either. It doesn't necessarily need to be a merge. But it shouldn't be a stand-alone. SportingFlyer T·C 10:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as basically something thought up by one author. The development of that into an article with wholly uncited 'History' and 'Solutions', tied together into a story with pure WP:SYNTH, is simply WP:OR. The 'Solutions' in particular would remain as OR even if its components are cited, because their assemblage as solutions to this particular problem will remain completely in the mind of the synthesising editor. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Faris Mannekkara[edit]

Faris Mannekkara (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Likely to fail WP:NBIO - sourced to PR/puff pieces.
Earlier draft: Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara KH-1 (talk) 00:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Although the editor who made this page did a mistake by creating a draft and then again creating it into the main space, maybe he is a newbie that's why....but if we look at the person's page, he was awarded the community Leader Award from the Kerala State Women's Development Corporation which is a state award from the person's home state which is in Kerala and the Fulbright Foundation’s Global Changemaker Award in 2023 which is a International award given by the US Government which i believe at least qualify the award category of the people's notability guidelines according to the guidelines written in Wikipedia. This guy also has a significant coverage in The Times of India, Economics Times , Ahmedabad Mirror which i believe is considered reliable in Wikipedia. So we have 2 of the 3 basic criteria except the national dictionary thing ....also While reading the content of these articles i don't see any kind of sponsored post written or a disclaimer in the news coverage these are just my analysis. SATavr (talk) 16:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It may be ignorance / new editor who wrote the draft and then made a new page, but destroyed the first edits in the first draft and deleted it in a completely unrecognizable form, added another person to it and added it to his date of birth and created a misunderstanding because of lack of knowledge?? Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara Difference between revisions [48], Draft:Muhammed Faris Mannekkara 2nd Difference between revisions[49] Spworld2 (talk) 06:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I do agree with you. It was a stupid mistake done by this new editor and i think he lacks the patience for it and just wanted to go directly with a shortcut way for publication. Thats why he change the draft content to a different person and he thought we would'nt know lol..... I believe he has learned a lesson not to do it again and i hope he has got to know that things doesnt workout like this. SATavr (talk) 09:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PR/churnalism doesn’t count. Both articles are just advertorials for his car company.-KH-1 (talk) 10:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These articles discuss his side automobile firm, yet his Wikipedia biography hardly ever mentions this information. The autogenerated nature of these stories is not disclaimed, as is typically the case. The name of the publisher, Sunil Chaurasia, is also mentioned in The Economic Times. His social work is the subject of major pieces that don't appear to be PR or churnalism. They include original research, such as his participation in and thorough coverage of the Sankesh Foundation and the Smiles Foundation. - [3] which is covered in the Ahmedabad Mirror. Another example is his relationship with Shyalash C, his mentor, which isn't mentioned on his Wikipedia page but is confirmed as original research in Punjab Kesari - [4]. Tiger-in-Action (talk) 09:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would be nice to hear from some more experienced editors about whether sourcing is sufficient to establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The person is currently serving as a Global Peace Ambassador under UN75. He has been awarded the Fulbright Award and a State Government Award from Kerala. He meets the basic criteria of WP:GNG and WP:BIO. With regards to his sources the news articles on his social work looks fine but the same cannot be said for some of his articles written about his second-hand car business found in google but considering that his Wikipedia page does not cover his car business, overall, it looks fine to me. Master rollo (talk) 11:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am seriously asking for experienced editors who frequent AFD discussions to review this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: I only get two pages of Gnews results, most are by "staff" or puff pieces/advertorials. The Fullbright sounds promising, but without sourcing we can't confirm, nor do we have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Best I could find was this [50]; GTranslate seems to say it's a staff piece, so likely about as unreliable as the rest of what's already in the article. Oaktree b (talk) 00:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Technology Connections[edit]

Technology Connections (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I follow this channel and had the redlink watchlisted, so I was cautiously optimistic to see it turn blue. But unfortunately I don't think it's reached notability yet. The existing sources are all primary links to the channel itself, and a BEFORE search for others turned up only interviews on other YouTube channels I wouldn't consider sufficiently reliable (e.g. [51][52], a one-paragraph entry at [53] that's borderline for SIGCOV, and short summaries of videos like [54][55] that either aren't SIGCOV or aren't RS or both. Sdkb talk 00:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orthobifastigium[edit]

Orthobifastigium (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources can be found about orthobifastigium. Google Scholar is nearly empty [60], and so does the Google Books [61]. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 11:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/Yesterday&oldid=768995417"