User:Cyberbot I/AfD's requiring attention

Below are the top 25 AfD discussions which are most urgently in need of attention from !voters. The urgency for each AfD is calculated based on various statistics, including current number of votes, time until closing date, number of times relisted, overall discussion length, etc. This page is updated by a bot roughly every 6 hours, and was last updated on 19:48, 28 April 2018 (UTC).

AfD	Time to close	Votes	Size (bytes)	Relists	Score
Seyedmeysam Agha Seyedhosseini	6 years ago	0	2852	2	539.82
Siddhartha (American rock band)	6 years ago	0	1479	0	524.96
UFC 228	6 years ago	0	2543	1	524.77
Games for the Many	6 years ago	0	5064	1	523.02
Muhammad Asad Chaudhry (Journalist)	6 years ago	0	2312	0	514.11
Topaz Winters (2nd nomination)	6 years ago	1	5328	0	491.01
Hammy Havoc	6 years ago	1	3065	2	488.68
2017–18 Basketball Champions League Qualifying rounds	6 years ago	1	4538	2	486.41
Rock Boat	6 years ago	1	3819	2	482.6
EnterMedia, Inc.	6 years ago	1	6275	1	482.16
Ruffwear	6 years ago	1	2476	0	479.41
Never the Bride	6 years ago	1	6304	2	469.86
Yeshiva University Medical Ethics Society	6 years ago	1	2726	0	468.6
Sri Ayyappan Temple Vennandur	6 years ago	0	1628	0	462.65
Periya Mariamman Temple Vennandur	6 years ago	1	1870	0	462.05
Husan Sharif	6 years ago	1	1718	0	461.22
Roland Caldwell Harris	6 years ago	0	2866	0	454.04
Palgwatang	6 years ago	1	4638	2	446.72
Sani Aliyu	6 years ago	0	1424	0	445.34
Lambda Solutions	6 years ago	0	1998	0	442.37
Quantum 9	6 years ago	0	2724	0	432.69
George Saghir	6 years ago	2	3832	0	430.26
Robert Toth (3rd nomination)	6 years ago	0	2950	0	429.37
Kalyani Vallath	6 years ago	0	3484	0	426.05
DAV foundation	6 years ago	0	2520	0	423.71

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:11, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Seyedmeysam Agha Seyedhosseini

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

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

Notability H.Fatemi ♪ 13:11, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:20, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:20, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Szzuk (talk) 07:20, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Szzuk (talk) 07:11, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

• I am sympathetic to a political cartoonist living as a refugee but I can't find substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Is there anything in Persian? FloridaArmy (talk) 14:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

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

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

The result was keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) KingAndGod 16:12, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Siddhartha (American rock band)

Siddhartha (American rock band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

No indication of notability. There are no reliable sources that discuss the band significantly. It is also a violation of WP:V as no sources support any of the statement in the article. KingAndGod 07:08, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Keep There is coverage, such as: https://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/well-get-the-airwaves/Content?oid=2186799 https://www.popmatters.com/159406-siddhartha-if-it-die-2495844865.html http://magnetmagazine.com/2012/04/16/mp3-at-3pm-siddhartha/ https://consequenceofsound.net/2012/05/album-review-siddhartha-if-it-die/ https://beatsperminute.com/media/bpm-video-premiere-siddartha-sometimes-you-get-so-alone-it-just-makes-sense/ Ross-c (talk) 15:24, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

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. SoWhy 11:46, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

UFC 228

UFC 228 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Source indicated in the article do not support content. A WP:BEFORE found no source announced this event - WP:CYRSTAL and fails WP:GNG. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 13:04, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 13:08, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 13:08, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 13:08, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Szzuk (talk) 07:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:10, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete Considering who the article creator thinks will be in the fight, WP:MADEUP. As usual, wait for PR before creating. Nate • (chatter) 00:19, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
• Delete Currently the article has been blanked, but when I look at the earlier versions there's a lot of speculation and unsupported claims. I have no objection to the article being recreated when actual information from reliable sources can be added. Papaursa (talk) 19:36, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

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 Moved to Draft. Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:06, 6 May 2018 (UTC) Now at Draft:Games_for_the_Many butyou can move it within draft per editorial consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Games for the Many

Games for the Many (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Founded only 11 months ago - fails WP:SUSTAINED. References provided are either mentions-in-passing or rely almost exclusively on company produced material and/or quotations (fails WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND). Edwardx (talk) 12:14, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment - @Edwardx: you are definitely right about the general passing reference/quotation bit - the gamesindustrybiz is the only reference not to fall afoul of that, I feel. I would not say that it violates WP:SUSTAINED to a sufficiently strong degree to necessitate deletion on that ground. I am ambivalent about this particular article, but was surprised not to see a CorbynRun page - many of the issues about the referencing issue would go away and it certainly would be more deserving of a page that numerous other comparable ones. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
• Move to CorbynRun. The article refers to a lot of references that are actually for the game. Video Game developers are rarely notable (Especially only making one game), but the actual game they produced naturally got a lot of press. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:56, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
• Comment As we've noted CorbynRun would be a better location, but this couldn't just be dropped in as-is - a fairly significant re-formatting/deletion would be needed to make it fit that category. Just wanted to note that in the hope that we don't recommend the creation of an article that would itself be AfDed Nosebagbear (talk) 10:44, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
• Comment I'd prefer a merge but can't find a good location, so failing that rename as per above. Szzuk (talk) 18:52, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Newbiepedian (talk · C · X! · L) 01:03, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

• Move to CorbynRun to formalise my viewpoint in my comment. Obviously some trimming needed when it does. I assume that moving a page actually undergoing AfD is either impossible or distinctly frowned upon. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• I would like to see this Draftified under the name of the video game (and/or submitted to AFC afterwhich). It's not obvious to me that the video game meets the bar for WP:GNG (a few of the sources in the article aren't obviously reliable (or are obviously unreliable)), but even if it does, this article needs a significant rewrite to clearly be about that topic rather than the producing organization. --Izno (talk) 14:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

  I can understand the draftify argument on the "not appropriate as is" case, but I would have thought that draftifying under a different name was inappropriate - a name change is substantial, and would defeat the grounds for something to be userfyed. I would say if we do draftify, leave as-is, and drop an extended message with our thoughts. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

  Nope, no reason we can't decide to rename the page now (except perhaps some WP:BURO objection that doesn't come to mind)--we should leave a message either way. My notion was Draft:CorbynRun, not a userfied draft. --Izno (talk) 17:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

  Ah I see Nosebagbear (talk) 18:28, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

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. SoWhy 11:46, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Muhammad Asad Chaudhry (Journalist)

Muhammad Asad Chaudhry (Journalist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Journalists are not given an automatic free pass over WP:BIO just because they exist — their ability to qualify for Wikipedia articles is determined by criteria at WP:JOURNALIST. The article claim he authored a book but I found it non-notable (at least by WP standard). Search produce stories the subject has done for Pakistani newspaper Daily Times but doesn't produce any coverage in independent RS about himself so fails to meet basic GNG. Saqib (talk) 05:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete I can only find article by him, none about him. Nor can i find any coverage of his book. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:58, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
• Delete. The article doesn’t even present a prima facie case for notability. Husounde (talk) 00:59, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:53, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Topaz Winters

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Topaz Winters
• Articles for deletion/Topaz Winters (2nd nomination)

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

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

Lack of Notability, for a biography of a living person. As said before WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR and was re-created after having been deleted previously with no significant changes Zubin12 (talk) 14:08, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete A ref-bombed article on an 18-year old author who apparently has 8 mental disorders. I'm not checking all 95(!) references (including Facebook, Youtube, etc), if somebody feels there's any plausible importance please list at most 4 that you think demonstrate notability. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:47, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Disagree on notability. Article appears similar in notability to Aaron Lee, Joshua Ip, Rain Chudori, Cyril Wong. See awards from CINE Golden Eagle Awards, Jane Goodall Institute, My Rode Reel Film Festival; publications by Cicada Magazine, Cosmonauts Avenue, Wildness; press references from The Straits Times, India-West, Wattpad; record holder with relation to a notable literary prize ("She is primarily known as the youngest Singaporean ever to be nominated for the Pushcart Prize and is a two-time nominee"); notability of "Half Mystic" section ("Half Mystic's staff, readers, contributors, and authors have been published and profiled in Best of the Net, Best American Poetry, Best New Poets, The Paris Review, Rolling Stone, NPR, The Huffington Post, The Chicago Tribune, and The New York Times, and are Pushcart Prize, MTV Video Music Awards, and Grammy nominees"); recognition for books ("poems for the sound of the sky before thunder debuted at the 2017 Singapore Writers Festival, while Heaven or This has been read by over 30,000 people"). All sources appear legitimate at least for those instances.

Article has unnecessary information which should be culled - mental disorder information, full list of publications and awards, etc. That the author is 18 years old and has mental disorders is irrelevant to this discussion. Not a reason to keep or delete the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lillian Paterson (talk • contribs) 06:57, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

• Keep In agreement with Lillian Paterson. All the references are excessive but the ones I checked were for real. Also Googled the author and found a wealth of legitimate articles on her work, in addition to her record holder status for a notable writing award and recognition by Singapore Writers Festival of her last book. This person has the notability to be on Wiki but the page needs to be trimmed down. Sweetmachine 12:00, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
• Draftify-Echo Power-en-wiki.~ Winged Blades^Godric 15:27, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:10, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Hammy Havoc

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

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

Spam article. All substantive edits are by an editor with a name match for a music industry PR. Near-certain undisclosed paid editing. Guy (Help!) 07:40, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

• Keep. I don't work in the music industry or in PR, I work in retail. There are several people with my name. Could you cite the source for where you found the matching name? I also haven't been paid to edit anything and have no connection to the subject. --Amy Mowatt (talk) 05:01, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:56, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:56, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Szzuk (talk) 13:54, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Szzuk (talk) 07:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

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

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

The result was merge to 2017–18 Basketball Champions League. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:09, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

2017–18 Basketball Champions League Qualifying rounds

2017–18 Basketball Champions League Qualifying rounds (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

This article is not notable and is uncompleted and irrelevant. If we are not doing articles of the regular season groups with match details, it's absurd to do an specific article for the qualifying rounds. With the scores in the main article of the competition, as in the previous season, is just enough. Asturkian (talk) 11:37, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:47, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:47, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose. The articles about another stages of this tournament exist: 2017–18 Basketball Champions League Playoffs, 2018 Basketball Champions League Final Four. So why the first stages (qual. rounds / regular season) are not notable? I vote to keep and I think the article about 2017–18 Basketball Champions League Regular Season could be created also, similar to 2017–18 EuroLeague Regular Season. Also, the "uncompleted article" is not a reason to delete it. 91.124.117.29 (talk) 18:02, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:21, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment, I think these articles need condensing into just one, I'm not certain though. Szzuk (talk) 08:04, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

• Merge into 2017–18 Basketball Champions League, preferrably in a collapsable section. That way the information is where the typical reader would look for it.Jacona (talk) 12:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

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

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

The result was keep. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Rock Boat

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

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

Article has no sources besides rockboat.com. No significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Vexations (talk) 11:36, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:07, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment, 3 refs have been added to the article. Szzuk (talk) 09:24, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
• Comment Keep- sorry, I went to the page from here, so I should have tagged that I added a couple of refs. I've just now used the NY Times link (probably the most reliable I've found) to support certain parts of the history section that it also covers, but there are some other parts of it that could use better refs if they're found. Personally I would say it is Keep now, but want to see if my sourcing stands up sufficiently. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:39, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Have opted for Keep, since I think there is a minimal level of acceptable refs Nosebagbear (talk) 21:57, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:35, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

• Keep, the article could do with a cleanup but there's a new york times ref and other bits and pieces. Szzuk (talk) 10:33, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:48, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

EnterMedia, Inc.

EnterMedia, Inc. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Virtually no independent coverage, highly promotional and fails GNG. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:42, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I do not believe the article to be promotional at all. All sources are external with years of existence. I have made sure to edit the wording in a way that has no promotional value. I have tagged myself according to Wikipedia's policy.

Brandfolder and dropbox (service) are competitors and there article is much more promotional. They even list features of the product. Entermedia Inc only mentions how it works not why you should buy it. Please let me know, where is the promotional material inserted before deleting? Please, I have spent hours upon hours on this to create it clean and un-promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcambron (talk • contribs) 15:38, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Jcambron See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 15:46, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 16:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 16:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio -related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 16:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

I understand and just used the other companies as an example. If we focus on just the content on Entermedia, Inc. you will see that there is criticism as well as one positive reception of the product, which is the only part of the article that seems promotional, if-that. Of course this can be deleted to comply with Wikipedia's terms and conditions. The references are external and have existed for years, nothing is new. Please help me understand and edit the article to make it encyclopedic. Thank you for your time and suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcambron (talk • contribs) 15:18, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment An article about the same topic EnterMedia DB (service) was speedily deleted on 2018-04-05 under criterion G11( Unambiguous advertising or promotion). The relevant policy for promotion (not allowed) is Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion. If we decide that the article is not promotional, or that the promotional tone can be fixed, the notability guidelines for businesses is applicable. The article would then need to meet the criteria in Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Vexations (talk) 19:02, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 22:00, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment I'm struggling to find a reason not to vote delete, the article creator hasn't demonstrated the subject is notable with WP:RS. Szzuk (talk) 15:06, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
• Delete. I'm all for open source, but the bottom line is the references in the article don't come close to meeting WP:CORP, and nothing better has been presented in this AfD. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:06, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Ruffwear

AfDs for this article:

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

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

Seemingly non-notable company that possibly fails WP:GNG and most definitely fails the reformed WP:NCORP guidelines. The company exists, but in-depth coverage about said company is lacking. Some news stories do cover the topic, but these take the form of product announcements or reviews that throw in a trivial mention of Ruffwear. Nothing exists that indicates how or why Ruffwear is individually distinct or notable when compared to similar companies, nor why the former's inclusion in an encyclopedia is warranted. In addition, (note the following point is more of an observation than a policy argument) the article was created by an editor (User:Ruffwear) with a clear conflict of interest. SamHolt6 (talk) 00:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete: A WP:COI article on a company, sourced to passing mention in local media and best-places type lists. There has been an analysis of the weak sources on the article Talk page since April 2010 without improvement. No claim to notability, and no better coverage found in searches. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 05:10, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 05:12, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

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 no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:11, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Never the Bride

Never the Bride (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Promotional and unsourced. I looked on the web and couldn't find any indepth independent sources on the band, only events they perform at. Please prove me wrong. GRuban (talk) 11:20, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

• Weak Keep - I have actually heard of this band many times over the years and was surprised to find that they have very little significant coverage in reliable sources. Everything about them online says that they have been praised by the likes of Roger Daltrey and Carlos Santana but I cannot find original sources that can truly be verified, though the claims have been repeated by supposedly professional writers. On the other hand, there are a few things that can qualify for WP:NBAND #1. They have been covered by Billboard in relation to another notable fan, Shirley Bassey: [1]. Here are some reasonably noteworthy reviews that help with basic notability: [2], [3], [4]. I submit that these sources are beyond just evidence of gigs, as the nominator said, but I will admit that it's still a stretch. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 17:06, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, those last seem to be articles from the venues the band was playing at at the time, so, even if reliable, not really independent. And their tone confirms that: "...an intense singer with radiant charisma is magnificently accompanied..." --GRuban (talk) 18:18, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

• This debate is starting to take shape of what is currently happening with the AfD discussion for Joshua Fried (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Joshua_Fried) in that it's a subject/person accomplished enough that would probably merit an article but, surprisingly, lacks the requisite evidence to pass the wikipedia article threshold. Based on that it will probably get deleted but this may be one of those case studies of why WP guidelines could benefit from a serious re-evaluation of why some quite accomplished bands/people don't qualify for articles, but other of less accomplishment do. ShelbyMarion (talk) 20:57, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

• The problem is - how do we know? Without high quality independent sources, we're basically stuck with "this is what they say about themselves", which, I hope you can see, is less than ideal. --GRuban (talk) 15:31, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

• The stuff on the charting of "The Living Tree" should easily be sourceable should anyone wish to do so.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

The Living Tree (song) -- This might help a bit, but the original by Never the Bride did not chart. The cover version by Shirley Bassey charted. Adding this to the Never the Bride article, as notable songwriting, can reinforce my own "Weak Keep" vote above. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 12:44, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Szzuk (talk) 07:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeshiva University Medical Ethics Society

Yeshiva University Medical Ethics Society (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Student-run organization article that does not credibly state significance/notability as per WP:ORG. No secondary sources. Reads like a brochure for the organization. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 04:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Comment Initial contributor to the article was Medicalethics and has not edited since 2006. Possible WP:COI created page. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 04:18, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Every morning (there's a halo...) 04:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete as lacking notability in independent sources and unlikely to do so as a relatively new (2005) student society Aloneinthewild (talk) 09:56, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

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. Sandstein 06:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Sri Ayyappan Temple Vennandur

Sri Ayyappan Temple Vennandur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Lack of any coverage in reliable sources to satisfy notability. MT Train^Talk 03:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete, nn temple. Szzuk (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Periya Mariamman Temple Vennandur

Periya Mariamman Temple Vennandur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Very few hits in Google search, with most of them being unrelated. Not enough coverage in reliable sources to pass notability. MT Train^Talk 11:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete, nn, 5 refs none of them reliable, google maps shows it is small. Szzuk (talk) 19:20, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Husan Sharif

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

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

Only source is a dead link, no other sources found for either Husan Sharif or his ancestor Zotti Geddi Sharif. Yunshui ^雲_水 11:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Yemen-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete, nothing much in the article, could possibly have gone via speedy. Szzuk (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

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. Randykitty (talk) 15:11, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Roland Caldwell Harris

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

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

Poorly referenced biography of a municipal bureaucrat. While he might qualify to have a Wikipedia article if he could be properly sourced over WP:GNG for this, the only properly footnoted references here are to a Blogspot blog, not a reliable source. And while there's one additional reference contextlessly listed under a separate "sources" header after the references header, it names the newspaper and the date but fails to provide the title of the content being referenced, so I had to run a ProQuest search to determine that it's just his WP:ROUTINE obituary, which means that it doesn't singlehandedly vault him over GNG all by itself if it's the only non-blogspot source on offer. No prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can do much better than this, but the fact of having a piece of municipal infrastructure named after him is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be sourced much better than this. Bearcat (talk) 01:46, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:27, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:27, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:04, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete I feel like this subject might have warranted a page in the 1930s or 40s if Wikipedia was around. As it stands, there just aren't enough reliable sources out there. There are a few, but they seem less concerned with the man and more focused on the water treatment plant that bears his name. I couldn't find a source that referenced anything other than his time as Commissioner of Public Works in Toronto, and even that information was limited. Gargleafg (talk) 07:37, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
• Keep There is this: http://www.beachesliving.ca/pages/index.php?act=landmark&id=36 and https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/meet-the-man-who-shaped-20th-century-toronto/article4186743/ and http://spacing.ca/toronto/tag/roland-caldwell-harris/ All articles about RC Harris mention the water plant, but that does mean that his notability is solely due to the water plant. Ross-c (talk) 11:50, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Beaches Living is not a reliable source at all — it's a neighbourhood web business directory, not a real media outlet, so that link counts for all of exactly nothing. The Spacing link does not list any articles that are substantively about R. C. Harris at all — it just lists a few short blurbs about the plant, not anything about Harris as a person that would help him get over WP:GNG. So the only one of those links that counts for anything at all is The Globe and Mail — but that's one piece of coverage toward an inclusion criterion that requires a hell of a lot more than just one piece of coverage. Bearcat (talk) 04:39, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. References do not support stand-alone article. Fails WP:GNG. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 04:50, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
• 'Keep' Harris was a person of no little significance in Toronto's past --- whatever the shortcomings of the article, it is better than nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.55.239.172 (talk) 11:46, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

No, a badly sourced article is not better than nothing — our basic credibility as a source of information depends on sourcing our articles properly so that people can't just make up random unsourced bullshit about him. Deletion of this would not prevent somebody from trying again in the future if they can actually locate better sourcing than we've been able to find so far, so we don't keep badly sourced articles just because they're "better than nothing". If somebody can do better than this in the future, they're absolutely more than welcome to do that — but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to require us to keep it in this state of sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 16:20, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

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 no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:02, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Palgwatang

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

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

Source searches are providing almost nothing to verify the existence of this, other than the single source in the article. Furthermore, the toic has not received significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. Does not meet WP:N. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:33, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:33, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete for having a very souped up claim on notability. -The Gnome (talk) 12:18, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
• Comment. The author posted a comment on the article's talk page: [5]. They suggested that Chinese sources on 八卦湯 may exist. Which is possible, but I don't read Chinese to verify that. (Also this might be more a Chinese dish than Korean dish in that case...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:18, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:59, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

• Weak oppose: I think it is a Korean food from the 23rd episode of Dae Jang Geum. And I found some Korean sources for this food #1 (by Health Chosun) and #2 (by KISTI) etc. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 12:03, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted to allow editors evaluation of Garam's proposed sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:32, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Sani Aliyu

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

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

DG of a non-notable organisation National Agency for the Control of AIDS is not something that would be expected to have an article on English Wikipedia until xe meet GNG. Search doesn't produce any substantial information about the person so Can't see any significance. Saqib (talk) 09:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:46, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:46, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:52, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete The agency although glorified with the word "national": it is mere sub-agency in broader Health Ministry, there are many of such mini-mini deparments and they are all not notable So it is not surprising there are no sources for both it is leader and the organization. –Ammarpad (talk) 07:19, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:30, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Lambda Solutions

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

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

Fails WP:NORG Seraphim System ^(talk) 10:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete promotional article, references only minor awards and press releases. No real independant references Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:17, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
• Delete: fails WP:NCORP. A sales brochure, not an encyclopedia entry. Likely COI-based editing, going by the tone and the content. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:16, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

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. MER-C 10:48, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Quantum 9

Quantum 9 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)

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

Article about a non-notable consultant firm that fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Added to Wikipedia on the same day as Michael Mayes (entrepreneur), the founder of the firm. Both would appear to be created by undeclared paid editors. (As a side thought, the company is more likely to receive coverage in the press than a similar-sized consultant on building materials, because cannabis is an altogether more newsworthy topic.) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:04, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:04, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment I would vote delete, but for the award in the article. I am not sure what to make of it.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:46, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

According to our article on the Stevie Awards, entrants pay a fee of up to $505 and 30 to 40% of them receive awards. The company seems to have been given a bronze Management Award in 2017 in the category "Executive of the Year - Business & Professional Services - Less Than 100 Employees". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:08, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

What about the "Best Management Consulting Firm" recognition?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't think that a "Best International Marijuana Consulting Firm" award from an online magazine of unknown reliability is enough to show notability. I'm inclined to vote to delete this article, but maybe I'm wrong about that award or someone can show the GNG is met.Sandals1 (talk) 10:47, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:52, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

• Weak Delete After thinking this through, there is not much to support GNG or any other form of notability.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
• Delete: does not meet WP:NCOPR. Likely UPE based on behavioural evidence. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:07, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:56, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

George Saghir

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

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

As per this reference, the subject is a Syrian economist based in New York but Google search doesn't produce any substantial information about the person so I Can't see any significance here.

Subject does not appear to meet GNG and lacks non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. Saqib (talk) 07:38, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

• Keep The subject, who is senior in age, started advising the Syrian government one year before the Arab Spring, and is known for his pro-Syrian government position. Absolutely of significance WP:N to anyone observing Syria - including the governments of the US, Great Britain and France. Would recommend AfD removed immediately, and post of link in Arabic or Russian to his profile on Wikipedia if available. Simone2049 (talk) 05:14, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note for closing admin: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HorseManJack

You need to provide evidence that this person is adviser to the Syrian government. And by the way do we have entry on this person in Arabic or Russian WP's ? I can't locate it. --Saqib (talk) 07:14, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

You need to take a crash course in definite and indefinite articles in English. And also contact your network to search for the requested articles.Simone2049 (talk) 05:30, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  samee  converse  09:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions.  samee  converse  09:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete - I fail to find any sources supporting the assertions made above, or anything that supports notability for this person. There isn't even a claim to notability in the article. --bonadea contributions talk 15:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
• Delete - I googled him and found a quote from him in the Atlantic,[[6]] but nothing substantive enough to base an article on. Fails WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timtempleton (talk • contribs)

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Robert Toth

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Robert Toth
• Articles for deletion/Robert Toth (2nd nomination)
• Articles for deletion/Robert Toth (3rd nomination)

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

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

Apparently non-notable, does not meet WP:ARTIST. I've not been able to access the two sources in the page, but I believe that they are cartoons by the subject. I've found some promotional material for this person, but no in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources. Note: the page appears to have been created by someone close to the subject; I've removed some unsourced personal detail per WP:BLP, and am somewhat curious to know where that came from – it's not on his website, for example. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Further note: Although this has come up as "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Toth (3rd nomination)", it is the first deletion discussion for this person; the previous two nominations related to a quite different Robert Toth, a commercial artist in the United States. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:51, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:51, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:51, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment, the first two afds appear to have been for this Robert Toth, this afd is concerning a different Robert Toth. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:57, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:52, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete no WP:RS, no awards. Just some illustrations he has done. Plus WP:COI. --Theredproject (talk) 16:30, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:27, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Kalyani Vallath

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

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

The subject has received some coverage in indepdent RS such as this one and this but still does not appear to meet relevant notability guidelines. She is author of a book - Contemporary Encyclopaedia of British Literature - which is not notable (at least by WP standards). The subject fails to meet both WP:AUTHOR and basic GNG IMO. Perhaps Wikipedia:NotJustYet. Saqib (talk) 11:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 11:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 11:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women -related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 11:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

• Comment - So it's a self-published encyclopedia according to this source, which also has all of the hallmarks of sponsored content (what's the story here -- a person is self-publishing an encyclopedia of English literature, deferring to that person's words/descriptions for nearly all of the piece). There's also this one in addition to those linked in the nomination above. The publications themselves seem fairly legit, but I can't get past the promotional feel of some of the content to keep (nor do I have evidence of that promotional quality to justify !voting delete). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:17, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

*Comment There is no doubt that she has been in many news and has been well known among literature student in India. I've searched the sources about this figure and found that she qualifies to be in wiki. ( vote - Keep)AntiHeroAnkit (talk) 07:49, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Note Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Antites.

• Weak delete. The Menon Hindu piece goes a long way towards meeting WP:GNG. But all the other sources I can find are either also non-independent of the subject or the Hindu sources, only mention her briefly (as the Deccan Chronicle source in the article does), or are too promotionally written for me to consider them reliable (as the fwdlife.in source and the Aswin Hindu sources are). The pattern of promotional editing here is also unhelpful. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:51, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

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 no consensus. leaning towards delete, but neither side is very compelling, so defaulting to no consensus after it has been relisted twice. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

DAV foundation

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

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

This is yet another non-notable blockchain company. My searches for "DAV foundation" and "DAV network" do not turn up any coverage in reliable sources. SmartSE (talk) 11:48, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

I've just posted this on my talk page in reply to a question about the sources used in the article: "Forbes/sites are not under editorial control of Forbes and are not considered reliable. Techbullion "offers digital marketing services for Financial Technology companies" so is also not reliable. The Blockchain news source is obviously copied from a press release." SmartSE (talk) 14:28, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 12:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

• Keep - I agree about the questionable legitimacy of the Techbullion articles. However, I do think that the Forbes article, as well as the article posted in Vice about the DAV Foundation which I added as a citation are a different story. Disclaimer, I work at the DAV Foundation, and am quite familiar with the work being done there. The fact that its technology is based on blockchain shouldn't necessary lump it in the same group as the endless other "blockchain companies" out there. The Foundation does truly unique things in its role as a consortium bringing together some of the biggest companies in the world in an effort to create open standards for autonomous transportation. I agree the article itself can use some improvements to be more in line with Wikipedia's quality standards; I will be happy to help improve it. ZzzrByte —Preceding undated comment added 14:11, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

— ZzzrByte (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:19, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

• Delete: does not meet WP:NCORP. Promo 'cruft. Wikipedia is not a replacement for a corporate website. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:19, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 18:11, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

• Keep: Meets the requirements of WP:NCORP for having significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources. This includes an independent feature in Vice, and extensive coverage and interviews about the foundation in Next: Blockchain a documentary series about the history and future effects of blockchain technology (beyond a paywall unfortunately but can see this in credits on amazon page and in the trailer). — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZzzrByte (talk • contribs) 15:03, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

striking duplicate !vote. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:09, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

• Keeo: Has significant coverage in industry publications. Peter303x (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:45, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

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.