Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:09, 3 October 2022

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to People. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Note: In most cases there is another, more specific category than this one.

If possible, please use one of these instead:

Note: The following pages are transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Note: the following pages are not transcluded onto the Biography Deletion sorting page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fashion (e.g. models)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women
Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography/Deletion for adult film actors and actresses

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary, it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|People|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to People.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

People

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Srutimala Duara

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

A longstanding WP:SPA article with uncited information. The provided mentions and searches find no evidence of attained biographical notability. The website mentioned in the profile does not work. The South Star Hill (talk) 19:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The South Star Hill (talk) 19:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, and Assam. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:12, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes criteria 3 of WP:NAUTHOR. Her novel Travelling with Dreams is reviewed in Das, Debarati (March 2019). "Depiction of Insurgency in Duara's Travelling with Dreams". Writers Editors Critics. 9 (1): 80-84. and her book Mindprints of Guwahati is the subject of this literary analysis journal article: "Past Verses Present; Metamorphosis in Different Spheres of Guwahati: A Study of Srutimala Duara's Mindprints of Guwahati". SMART MOVES JOURNAL IJELLH. 8 (2): 13. doi:10.24113/ijellh.v8i2.10421. There are likely more reviews not in English, but Assamese. Best.4meter4 (talk) 19:33, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the reviews noted above. And I learned that Assamese is a language I'd not known about before. Double whammy.Oaktree b (talk) 23:18, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:AUTHOR - for Travelling with Dreams, there is also UNREST OF DESIRES: FACETS OF REALITY IN SRUTIMALA DUARA'S TRAVELLING WITH DREAMS in INTERFACE A NATIONAL RESEARCH ANTHOLOGY ON INDIGENOUS LANGUAGE, LITERATURE & CULTURE (2021). I have also added sources to the article from the WP Library and GBooks about her career, writing, and an award. Beccaynr (talk) 21:40, 15 October 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:14, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Helmes

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

Unsourced article for 12 years. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BEFORE searches show nothing of note. Skipple ☎ 17:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Radio, and Australia. Skipple ☎ 17:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing WP:GNG. He's written a lot of articles, but I was unable to find any coverage of Helmes. W 42 17:40, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Plenty of "about the author" hits for the various publications he uses, social media links, nothing about him. Oaktree b (talk) 17:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:BIO, lacking indepth coverage of him as the subject. LibStar (talk) 03:34, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to List of Papua New Guinea women Twenty20 International cricketers. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Geua Tom

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

While the subject has played at the international level, and thus would meet WP:CRIN, the subject does not pass WP:GNG as no significant coverage of her exists. Per WP:NSPORTS2022 "sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject". This may also be a case of WP:TOOSOON as the first international game was played less than 2 weeks ago. W 42 16:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and Cricket. W 42 16:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to ~~List of United Arab Emirates women Twenty20 International cricketers~~ List of Papua New Guinea women Twenty20 International cricketers. Fails WP:NSPORT both WP:NCRIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. With no significant coverage, and all the sources being statistics or passing mentions in routine sports reports/announcements, inclusion here is best done in an appropriate list. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 17:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Oceania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably Wjemather means redirect to List of Papua New Guinea women Twenty20 International cricketers? I'd go along with that redirect certainly. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yes, of course. Copy-paste error while redirecting a batch of other similar stubs to avoid more AFDs! _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 11:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Papua New Guinea women Twenty20 International cricketers (as appears to have been done with others). I keep asking people not to create these anymore despite in this case having played in a major qualifier event unless they can find additional coverage. Thanks also for adding the nolink parameters on the list page. Bs1jac (talk) 09:09, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would also agree with the comment that this is a case of WP:TOOSOON. There are still a couple of users at least who create players (either as stubs or redirects) as soon as an individual features in certain tournaments, when really playing in said tournament should only be the first step towards a page being potentially viable. Bs1jac (talk) 15:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This page should stay as the player has played in 2022 ICC Women's T20 World Cup Qualifier tournament. As per Wiki Project Cricket Notability, the player's page can be created. Thanks,Vikram Maingi (talk) 14:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, according to WP:NCRIC, WP:CRIC notability point 2 and WP:OFFCRIC (international cricket point 3), a person from an associate nation playing in the women's T20 WC Qualifier passes minimum cricketing criteria, but they must also meet WP:GNG. Bs1jac (talk) 20:27, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Papua New Guinea women Twenty20 International cricketers Fails WP:NCRIC as T20I matches weren't in notable competitions for notability, but more importantly fails WP:GNG. Redirect here is a suitable WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:53, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Technically the T20I matches in question are notable enough according to WP:CRIN which expands on WP:NCRIC, and WP:OFFCRIC; but that changes nothing as the player must still meet WP:GNG. Bs1jac (talk) 08:49, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that since the changes to NSPORT following the WP:NSPORT2022 RFC (particularly the removal of participation based criteria), it's clear that (as it stands) CRIN does not have community support, so cannot be used to determine notability in any way. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:05, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I thought that the big update to NCRIC had sorted all of that. Regardless, Associate nation players need to pass GNG going forward anyway. Bs1jac (talk) 16:11, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Papua New Guinea women Twenty20 International cricketers in line with WP:ATD. BoJó | talk UTC 13:51, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. WP:TNT applies. ✗plicit 14:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Abucha

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

Fails GNG and NPOL. Ministerial position is an appointment and no election was involved. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Politicians. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TNT: A cabinet minister is an WP:NPOL-conferring position, so he is notable. However, the article is better off being WP:TNTed and started again, as it is of practically irreparably poor quality. Curbon7 (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can handle writing up the new version, as I have experience writing about South Sudanese government ministers. Curbon7 (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That would be wonderful. I created a barebones stub at Talk:Martin Abucha/Temp which is meant to be used in place of the copyvio. It could stand a good dose of expansion and improvement. Whpq (talk) 02:02, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~*Keep~~ the subject is notable and the statements in the article are clearly verifiable. Deletion is not cleanup. I will tidy it up now but there’s no need at all for deletion. Mccapra (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ - Mining minister is a position in the national government's cabinet. WP:NPOL is clearly met. There is no requirement for the position to be elected, and I would be surprised if any cabinet level position in any government in the world was an elected one. I disagree with the sentiment expressed above that TNT applies. It is not a well-written article but it is not in such an irredeemable shape that requires deletion to resolve. -- Whpq (talk) 19:08, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - After further investigation, there is significant copyright violations from the initial version. A fresh article from scratch without foundational copyright issues would be better. -- Whpq (talk) 19:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  sounds better Okello Justine (talk) 08:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT. There isn't really anything worth salvaging here since it's all copyvios. Subject might be notable though. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I’ve struck my !vote in the light of potential copyright issues. A clean start may be best after all. Mccapra (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
isn't there a way i can rework on that martin abacha article again? i wanted to correct the mistakes but i cant even tap on the article Okello Justine (talk) 07:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Answered on editor's talk page. Whpq (talk) 13:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for Now: She is notable as she is a minister in Cabinet of South Sudan but there are copyright violations in the article so it have to be deleted. Contributor008 (talk) 17:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:TNT, without prejudice against recreation if somebody can write and source a new version properly. Even politicians who pass WP:NPOL aren't exempt from still having to follow all of Wikipedia's other content policies, such as our copyright rules. Bearcat (talk) 21:52, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to Jim Jones#Early life. Consensus here, after 2 relists, is that the content of this article should be merged into the primary article on Jim Jones. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:05, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Early life of Jim Jones

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

Should be deleted or merged into the main Jim Jones article Gtag10 (talk) 01:27, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge back I don't think this split was needed. Reywas92^Talk 02:18, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: I think that, while long, it does not deserve its own article. Asparagusus (interaction) 02:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't merge The content was split out at my suggestion in order to reduce the length of the main article and use summary style per FA requirements. There is still no space for most of the content in the main article (which is still probably too long to pass FAC). If this article should be deleted, it's because the details are excessive to the point of being unencyclopedic/intricate detail. I have no opinion whether this is the case. (t · c) buidhe 08:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer to Keep If not, I prefer to delete and not merge. The main article is already well above size limit recommended by WP:Length. Early life sub articles are common on biographies of prominent figures, eg Early life and career of Abraham Lincoln, Early life and career of Thomas Jefferson, Early life of Marcus Aurelius, Early life of Isaac Newton, Early life of Samuel Johnson, Early life of William Wordsworth, Early life of John Milton, etc, etc, etc. This is common practice for splitting lengthy biographies into sub articles. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 12:17, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's the ultimate OSE to say that because other more famous people have subarticles (which are long than this one) that this one should have a subarticle. No one denies the concept of subarticles, but the main article is just 61kb and this one remains quite duplicative of what remains in the main article as well. Reywas92^Talk 00:29, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I am ok with deleting this if that is consensus. But main article is over 10,000 words in the body, which is over the recommended length per WP:Length. I do not think we should merge the content back in. I do think the content is useful though, and would prefer to see it kept. Jim Jones is not a minor historical figure. There are more documentaries and books on his life than most of the aforementioned (Lincoln and Jefferson excluded) Jim Jones is one of the most wrote about figures in American history, and his early life is critical to the formation of his ideology. So it is a noteworthy topic, IMO. Cheers! —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 14:47, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Also - just want to point out. The Early Life section of the main article is the only section of the main article which will no longer have a sub-article when this is merged back in. The main article presently has five sub article. I also point out that merging this back in would go against the recommendation of peer review, the FAC review, and the GA review of this article. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 16:06, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion, and Indiana. Skynxnex (talk) 13:37, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all (and only) pertinent information into main article. Trillfendi (talk) 16:17, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Jim Jones#Early life, in agreement with the nominator and others that a separate article is excessive. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 22:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:46, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:57, 17 October 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Lyon-Bowes, Lord Glamis

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

No apparent notability. The article reads like a genealogical entry, presumably because there is not much else to say. It appears that the article exists solely because he is a great-grandfather of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, but that is not a good enough reason. Surtsicna (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility, United Kingdom, and Scotland. Surtsicna (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per Surtsicna. There seems to be no coverage in the sources that justifies notability. It is a merely genealogical entry. Sole claim to notability seems to be its relation to The Queen Mother and Elizabeth II. Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:41, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not meet WP:GNG. While a distant link to the Queen Mother and Elizabeth II, this is not sufficient alone for the article. Coldupnorth (talk) 17:33, 7 October 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Lyon-Bowes, Lady Glamis

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

No indication of nobility. The article is no more than a genealogical entry, as there is nothing else to say about the subject but their spouse and children. The article apparently exists solely because the subject is a great-grandparent of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. See WP:INVALIDBIO. Surtsicna (talk) 21:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, United Kingdom, and Scotland. Surtsicna (talk) 21:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is a gemological entry of a non-notable person. NO biographical information besides her birth date and children's names. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Does not show notability. Alex-h (talk) 16:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet WP:GNG. Coldupnorth (talk) 17:32, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Narendra Modi. Valid ATD that solves to the nomination issues. Star Mississippi 02:35, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heeraben Modi

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

Notability on Wikipedia is not inherited; all coverage this person has received in reliable sources is a consequence of, and relates to, her relationship to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:24, 2 October 2022 (UTC) For the record, I'm fine with a redirect, and would prefer that to outright deletion. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:22, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This is a misinterpretation of inherited notability. It doesn't matter why reliable sources cover her, only that they do (or don't, as the case may be). If she's received significant coverage, then she's notable, no matter who her son might be. pburka (talk) 20:40, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That isn't accurate, Pburka. Family members of famous individuals routinely receive extensive coverage in the media; we have articles on them only when they are a) independently notable, or b) when there is such a volume of coverage and biographical detail that a standalone page becomes necessary. Neither is true here. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:50, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's not supported by policy. If family members of famous people receive extensive coverage then they are notable per WP:BASIC. We don't care why someone became famous; only that they are. I encourage you to review WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:INVALIDBIO, which explain that significant coverage determines notability regardless of the person's relationship to a more famous person. She's not automatically notable because of her famous son, but she's not automatically non-notable, either! pburka (talk) 21:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You've both misread my statement, and misunderstood that essay. Nowhere have I said she's not notable because she's related to Narendra Modi; I've said she has no coverage that doesn't relate to that relationship. To put it in language you seem to prefer, SIGCOV does not exist, because the coverage is all about her son. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, relationships do not confer notability. She has received coverage, yes, but significant coverage? No. Only coverage for being Modi's mother. Bishonen | tålk 21:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Redirect to Narendra Modi, where the known and essential biographical details of Heeraben can be mentioned. I looked through all the cited sources in the current version and if one looks past the RefBombing, there is really no substantial independent coverage to be found. The sources essentially fall into two groups:
1. Trivial mentions in articles/books about Modi [1], [2], [3],
2. Copies or paraphrases of [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9] [10] a blog-post/tweet Narendra Modi wrote related to the subject.

Thousands of similar sources with trivial and/or non-independent coverage can be found on a web/news search but that does not help establish notability under WP:GNG. And a Google Book search spits out only sources in the first category along with this self-published book of images of the Modis "taken from the internet". Abecedare (talk) 22:03, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Abecedare above. Please note that her name can also be found spelled Hiraben Modi (already redirected) and Hiraba Modi in the English language press. Storchy (talk) 10:16, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : She is the recipient of Nari Jagran Samman 2016 award and its reported by all major newspapers in India. Being Modi's mother and being Nari Jagran Samman 2016 award makes her to pass the minimum 2 notability factors.Additionally she is within the Category:Indian_centenarians . Thus I think this article could be kept live. Jehowahyereh (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see no evidence that the award means anything. It's awarded by a non-notable magazine; I could not even find any evidence that anyone else has ever received the award, or that it's been awarded in other years. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's been reported as a substantial big features in almost all Indian Newspapers, which itself shows the prominense of that award. Jehowahyereh (talk) 05:11, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi , The award given by the media established in the year 1932 ( Sakal [11]) is removed by labeling non-notable awards. [12] What you are saying ( Jagran Prakashan 1975 ) is also an award given by the media. How is it accepted as notable? PravinGanechari (talk) 13:31, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I was going to nominate it for deletion per this exact reason when I came across it but got sidetracked. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. The award given is also not notable.PravinGanechari (talk) 2:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleteper Vanamonde.Saturnrises (talk) 12:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Keep the content, but potentially rename. There isn't a scenario where this content will be deleted. Discussion on whether to rename or create an article about the incident and merge it can continue editorially. Star Mississippi 14:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Crockwell

Nominating for procedural reasons, I know the article is well sourced but I am not sure it meets WIKI:GNG, WIKI:CRIME, or WIKI:BIO.--IMR2000 (talk) 11:11, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:30, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've not heard of the event, coverage seems to be purely local sources. Although it is going to the provincial Supreme Court, so that's something. Would like to see coverage from outside the area to show it was a notable event. Oaktree b (talk) 14:21, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call the Globe and Mail - the largest national newspaper in Canada, local. Or some of the Toronto-based CBC coverage (most of the coverage is indeed from Newfoundland, but some of the CBC coverage is very national - and the story did receive national attention at the time). I won't opine of the worthiness of the article though - I'm not well versed enough in crime. Nfitz (talk) 23:55, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:52, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The standoff appears to clearly be notable, and I think that the subject would be better covered in an article about the event rather than having a standalone article. He's not a WP:BLP1E; he has received coverage outside of the context of the standoff, but the extent has been much more minor. That being said, no page for the event yet exists, and I would hesitate to delete a notable article on the basis that some merge with a not yet existing article would be a potentially better way of providing coverage. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:41, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Move to an event page. Passes WP:SIGCOV. There's not really a policy based reason to delete or move this page as an WP:ATD. We have enough WP:SUSTAINED significant coverage across multiple events to prove notability for a biography page per WP:BASIC, and the coverage is sufficiently national in scope to pass criteria 1 of WP:CRIMINAL. That said per WP:PAGEDECIDE, I do think we might achieve better coverage for editorial reasons as an event page rather than a biographical entry.4meter4 (talk) 14:45, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is no event article to move this to. Should this article title just be changed so it is about the event instead of the individual? I don't see a lot of consensus for any particular action right now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to the event. The current sources still leave some uncertainty notability, however the event is more likely to be notable than the individual, due to WP:BIO1E. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:50, 23 October 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ülo Adamson

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. I don't trust myself to do a proper Estonian WP:BEFORE search, but see discussion at User_talk:Estopedist1#Ülo_Adamson from people who know better. Ovinus (talk) 02:57, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Estonia. Ovinus (talk) 02:57, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I prodded it, which was reverted without improvement. Not enough in-depth coverage to meet GNG.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously nominated via WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:17, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:44, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Estonian resistance fighter fails WP:NBIO with no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:26, 23 October 2022 (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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. RL0919 (talk) 21:45, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iimani David

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

No WP:RS via Google. The two books are self-published (The New York Literary Society, nylscares.org). ForeWord Magazine is pay for review. Created by JodiRhodes at 2010-12-12T20:57:32, the accounts only work. 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 21:03, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and Literature. 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 21:03, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. pburka (talk) 21:09, 1 October 2022 (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. Star Mississippi 17:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hu Wanlin

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

Violates WP:BLPCRIME, specifically For individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. There has been no conviction for homicide, only a conviction for practising medicine without a licence. The person is not independently notable fails WP:CRIMINAL. See also the discussion at WP:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#List of serial killers by number of victims. Polyamorph (talk) 15:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Crime. Polyamorph (talk) 15:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yikes. Too many WP:BLP concerns, no conviction for the crimes, notability is marginal. Ovinus (talk) 15:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my comments at the BLP noticeboard. The only possible case for notability seems to be the allegations of a crime that he has never been convicted of committing; as a non-public figure the BLP implications there are not good. His actual conviction for illegally practicing medicine is completely mundane (hardly rising to the levels recommended in WP:CRIMINAL of being well-documented and historically significant), and the coverage of it appears to be completely routine. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 08:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Caeciliusinhorto's analysis.4meter4 (talk) 16:07, 9 October 2022 (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. The argument that there is a lack of significant coverage in independent reliable secondary sources has not been successfully refuted, and as such the delete side prevails. Stifle (talk) 10:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ilario Bisi-Pedro

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources, there does seem to be a short passage in The Royal Court Theatre Inside Out but that is insufficient by itself to support notability. Seems to have played only minor roles in notable productions thus failing NACTOR. W 42 13:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Nigeria, and England. W 42 13:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Come on, there are sources to help back things up. Since this proposed deletion, I have tried to find more things to help save the page such as the actor was part of African Pan Players, who were invited to Senegal in 1966. There, with the Negro Theatre Workshop, they presented a show about slavery and the evolution of African art.^[1]

Then again, there are actor pages that have been on here for donkeys (Frederick Hall, Roy Spencer, Tom Kelly, Laurence Harrington, John Hallet, Eileen Helsby, Timothy Walker, Leonard Trolley to name but a few) and have gotten by with naff all for sources.Silurian25 (talk) 11:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That source is a single mention of Bisi-Pedro in a list of names which does not constitute WP:SIGCOV. The subject still needs to pass WP:GNG, but you are welcome to nominate other articles for deletion if you think they also do not comply with Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. W 42 21:44, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Also has appeared in movies in some capacity like The Dogs of War (getting machine gunned by Christopher Walken) and The Lady (playing anti-apartheid campaigner Archibishop Desmond Tutu). Surely the dedication to him at the end of his Some Girls would add some sort of acknowledgement as well?2A00:23C6:D88E:8901:8D26:EB90:E621:5335 (talk) 07:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~ : it’s great he has a lot of experience play roles on notable movies but I’m in stil in doubt if that stands a chance for subject to have a Wikipedia page since he fails the WP:GNG.--Gabriel^t@lk 03:21, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also why you don't submit article for review? Theirs something fishy with the way you create articles. 13 years account creation with just 134 edit count.--Gabriel^t@lk 03:31, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Chambers, Colin (2020). Black and Asian Theatre in Britain. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9781134216895.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 01:13, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:45, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : I was on patrol and i still met this page AFD once again. The subject fails WP:GNG. He has a IMDb profile that’s good for him. A Wikipedia page for him it’s not a must since he fails WP:GNG. Appearing on notable movies doesn’t still makes him suitable. @Silurian25:, just like what Winner 42 said. If you think they’re other articles like this, you can nominate them or you list them on my talk page for a check.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 23:38, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:38, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : I think this is clearly a well sourced article about an actor. It has (currently) seven citations, two of which are from textbooks. There are stubs which have many fewer citations than this, and indeed much less content, and are retained as encyclopedic. To delete this perfectly serviceable article would be ridiculous, and would not serve the overall goal of the encyclopedia. Patr2016 (talk) 19:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But all except possibly one of those seven citations do not meet the requirement of being significant coverage in independent reliable secondary sources. They are either unreliable web sites or only give Bisi-Pedro a name-check without providing any information. The possible exception is ISBN 9781840027631, which I can only see a snippet of on Google Books, but that snippet, and the extra content that I can see in a Google Books search, looks like an interview or quotation from him rather than anything that writes about him. I can find no other sources to expand on these. I have looked for both "Ilario Bisi-Pedro" and "Ilario Pedro". Phil Bridger (talk) 20:46, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sources are not sufficiently in-depth to meet WP:NBIO. MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:18, 29 October 2022 (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. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 01:07, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Saptarshi Gayen

AfDs for this article:

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

Autobiography, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rivugayen with no indication that the awards (beyond the BBC) are notable ones and not sure whether that's enough for ANYBIO. Unable to find any other indication of notability. Note, if this is deleted, Draft:Saptarshi Gayen may need to be. If it's kept, possible history merge. Star Mississippi 13:27, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Photography, and India. Star Mississippi 13:27, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:10, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non Notable person who got Not Notable Awards. Contributor008 (talk) 08:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:G5.4meter4 (talk) 18:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete WP:G5 Uhai (talk) 20:01, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Among the arguments grounded in policy, there was consensus that the sourcing was sufficient to show the subject's notability. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 17:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jusuf Barčić

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

Irrelevant BIO as one can be. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 07:15, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 07:15, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Shellwood (talk) 07:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, considering the souces, it isn't irrelevant. Governor Sheng (talk) 07:31, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Considering article actual content, it's absolutely irrelevant. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 07:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There does seem to be some mainstream news coverage. Can we check if this person gets significant coverage in any secondary sources, something analyzing their activities beyond the circumstances of death? The article seems to be burying the lede, talking about early and late life, but almost nothing about the middle, which is supposed to be the main claim to notability. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:58, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have never heard of this person in my life, so I tried to find something on him beyond reports of his traffic accident. Nothing. It seems that accident is the only reason in the first place why he found the way into media. It's sort of, this locally know reckless driver finally meat his maker, and here who he was. Standard eulogy for anons. Or maybe I am wrong.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 11:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
He is mentioned by secondary sources too. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22jusuf+barcic%22&btnG=. He is known for being a religous leader of many wahabbis in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Anyone familiar with the movement heard about him, as he was among the early ones, a pioneer so to say. Governor Sheng (talk) 09:22, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I checked six or seven (top to bottom - of course I skipped known "experts", lunatics like Tanasković, Nogradi, etc.) and found that he is still mentioned in passing, without information, whatsoever, on what that guy wanted, why is he significant if at all. So, he was an adherent of Salafism, and allegedly leader of a group, so what? What group, how big, what the group wanted is, of course, completely lacking in all papers that I checked. Why should anonymous adherent of Salafi Islamic sect be more relevant for English Wikipedia from, say, any ultra-conservative and radical sect in Christianity, just because he is mentioned in passing in some papers. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 12:11, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bottom line for his relevancy, something which could reasonably make him relevant for English Wikipedia: is this person proven recruiter of Muslims for any of the wars in the Middle East, or responsible for or significantly connected (not guilty by superficial association) to some violent terrorist act anywhere? If not, he is completely irrelevant for our project. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 15:36, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You reffering to someone as lunatic is enough for me. You're arguments aren't serious. Governor Sheng (talk) 06:12, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, lunatic fringe is: the members of a political or social group or movement who have the most extreme or foolish ideas [13] ౪ Santa ౪^99° 22:28, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody can be really sure they're not part of the group themselves. Governor Sheng (talk) 13:01, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can check them yourself, and tell what you have found out. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 11:49, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - the arguments brought by the nominator aren't serious enough. --Governor Sheng (talk) 06:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Irrelevant person. If he can get article, than you can make thousand more for various youtube guru's. --Mhare (talk) 10:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
He wasn't a YT guru, but a person regarded as the founder of the Salafist movement in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a guy you can find a lot about from bunch of scholarly works spaning from 1988 to present. YT gurus don't have such notoriety. Governor Sheng (talk) 12:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "movement" in B-H, nor anywhere else, nothing to create - you are either adherent/follower or not - Salafism is very concretely defined and you can inform yourself in our article about it, or about Salafism in B-H through one of sources in this one, Czech researcher Zora Hesová. There is nothing inherently noteworthy or sinister in it, unless individual decide to get violent criminal or terrorist in order to impose his worldview on others. He could have been preacher, or more precisely, as Mhare, said YouTube Salafi guru. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 10:39, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why it should be sinister? Its a noteworthy religious movement. Also, YT gurus have their articles - PewdiePie comes to mind. Also, Barčić died long before YT was a thing, but whatever. Governor Sheng (talk) 14:31, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:32, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content in this article has everything to do with cleanup and improvement. Santasa99, could you please tell me how does the subject fail GNG or any relevant subjective criteria. Thanks, ─ The Aafī (talk) 09:59, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We have nothing on this person regarding his career and activities which would made him relevant for the project - unless someone believes that being adherent of Islam and follower of Salafi sect is inherently significant for the English Wikipedia. By thorough cleanup of this article buried in lede, we would be left with an obituary to anonymous.౪ Santa ౪ ^99° 10:43, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is just your bias, the article has all what it needs. Governor Sheng (talk) 14:29, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - there are probably thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of Salafi communities around the world, with each, or at least most, having a more or less charismatic preacher as a leader, are grouped in smaller or larger communities, more or less isolated from wider society, etc. Are they all due for their own standalone article, or we need to establish some significance in their existence, beyond the superficial passing mention in barely few secondary sources.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 12:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are enough sources. He didn't establish just any "Salafi" community, the secondary sources are good evidence for that. Governor Sheng (talk) 14:29, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Daft AfD for subject with clear notability case for their role in Islamism in the Balkans - has dozens of scholarly mentions. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since when is Salafi religious fundamentalism equal Islamism? Who labels him as Islamist? Further, as I see the WP:Notability and WP:GNG we still need "Significant coverage", not passing mention - by the way, sources are good and independent, but they do not delve into Barcic persona and career as they should if we are to establish notability for standalone, mentions are anecdotal and superficial. I still wonder how many of people like this person could get their standalone article then, simply for being leaders of a village of 100 uneducated Salafi adherents, and/or caused a stir and commotion around a mosque that kicked them out. I mean, we have an article on fundamentalists like Kevin Swanson, but with him hangs half of United States conservative establishment, and he fills columns from Washington state to Finland, our guy here hangs with no one and fills only couple of those (online) tabloids in generally not so friendly countries to Bosnian Muslims, Serbia and Croatia. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 01:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Islamist because he sought to impose his religious preferences, reject secular institutions and install rule by sharia law - that's pretty much the working definition of Islamism. The subject is mentioned in numerous reliable, secondary scholarly works. That is amply notable by Wikipedia standards. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:27, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did not find any one of these sources labels him Islamist, while your definition of Islamism is more than just reductive, and in case of this person simply not used by scholarship cited in article. As far as I was able to read through the papers, nobody gave any description in relation to him which fits our Islamism article definition. Every mosque and every Muslim community on the planet function upon Sharia jurisprudence, there is nothing mythical nor sinister about it. He rejected secularism and went to live life of Salafi preacher based on Sharia in the forest with 50-60 of his followers. All we have in these papers about that is anecdotal passing mention, without in-depth description about his agency and its extent - he had no political organization to voice his worldview, no access to mosques, and I bet he didn't live long enough to start exploiting YouTube. If every fringe guru from every god forsaken mountain with a YouTube account deserves an article, we would bury our project with them. Indonesia has 230 million Muslims and innumerable Salafi adherents, one major sectarian war and at least one major Islamist militia, and we have one article on a person, a leader of who knows how many Salafis under arms - in contrast we have three articles on village gurus roaming rural Bosnia, who in the last 30 yrs. were able to bring under their sway few hundreds of uneducated youths mostly with a criminal record. What's the point, am I missing something? ౪ Santa ౪^99° 11:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Barčić isn't so isignificant as you think. The sources mention him as a person who fundamentaly shaped the Salafist community in BiH. The Salafist community in Bosnia and Herzegovina is itself a noteworthy phenomenon that needs to be explained on Wikipedia as well. Not only that, but as a sort of a pionir of the movement in BiH, he is mentioned by the sources, as a person who shaped also his "successors" Nusret Imamović and Bilal Bosnić, both of whom have their own respective articles here as well, and themselves are noteworthy. The mentions of him in the sources in questions aren't ancedotal, but well researched, as he is mentioned by notable researches from notable institutions, in a span from 1980s till the present day. That is not anectodal, and especially if the same facts were reported by many other scholarly sources. Governor Sheng (talk) 12:11, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now, you're a consipracy theorist. And it's you who is actually biased here, claiming that only because some of the sources are based in Croatia or Serbia, that they're anti-Bosnian Muslim. That's why your objections aren't serious. Governor Sheng (talk) 12:07, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In addition to an array of sources covering "Jusuf Barcic", there are just as many under the alternative name "Yusuf Barčić". Jusuf was a significant leader in the Salafist/Wahhabi movement in Bosnia and Herzegovina so I do not understand why he would be considered an insignificant figure. ElderZamzam (talk) 03:21, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How is he significant, what was he saying, writing (if at all), preaching, who influenced him and how, whom he influenced and how. Is he significant solely for being leader of Bosnian rag-tag group or was he a more than just that and how. Was he Modernist Salafi, Enlightened Salafi, was he purists, activists, jihadists. Article is grown paragraph or two since nomination, mostly through info repetition. This project lacks articles on leaders and authors the likes of Muhammad Musa Al-Sharif, but we have several Bosnian hicks, criminals and attention seekers, based on passing mention in several essays and papers on Bosnian group of couple of hundreds, not on any individual person. (It's like writing an article on local plum-brandy maker while lacking article on Pasteur. GNG says "significant" not any passing mention.) ౪ Santa ౪^99° 19:10, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This all reads like opinion. Significance is determined by a presence in multiple reliable, secondary sources. That's it. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you think the project is missing articles like "Muhammad Musa Al-Sharif", stop wasting time here and go create them. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:23, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are misinterpreting our core policy, which you can read as senior editor: GNG does not says that significance is established through sheer number of passing mention, it is actually state that significant mention is required if we want to establish notability. I find it disconcerting when senior editors try to misinterpret project's core policy. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 20:18, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dozens of scholarly mentions is not "a trivial mention" and your refusal to recognise this is becoming disruptive. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:31, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Number of mentions is trivial, if substance in those mentions is trivial. By the way, now you are obviously misquoting me as well - I said "passing mention" in sources, no matter how many one find is not enough to establish notability, GNG requires significant mention, and then writers of that core policy give us example what they had in mind - you are senior editor of 8 yrs of experience and 19 thousands of edits, so you better go on and read it yourself. Otherwise, you put yourself into situation where your persistence on notability of person like this makes no sense. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 08:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bla bla bla. This single source alone is a significant mention. So is this. So is this. As you have made plain, your reason for this nomination is a prejudice against encyclopedic articles on "Bosnian hicks, criminals and attention seekers". Not your call to make. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:44, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is still scope under ARBEE so please tone down your discussion. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 08:58, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Bla, bla, bla is not response I would expect from editor of your experience. Since we have trouble interpreting policies on establishing notability, I will quote here most basic parts:

Most crucial parts of WP:GNG and WP:NBASIC can be read here (bold emphasis is mine)

WP:GNG - "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.

- The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM.

- Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton, that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band.

Notability of people specific guideline WP:NBASIC - People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.

People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below.

Articles may still not be created for such people if they fall under exclusionary criteria, such as being notable only for a single event, or such as those listed in Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not.

--౪ Santa ౪^99° 08:55, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. The key part your are failing to read over and over again is: "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." This subject has more than "a trivial mention" in multiple scholarly sources, ergo job done, ergo stop wasting community time. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So? And how am I failing if I quoted it? ౪ Santa ౪^99° 09:00, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV from all appearances. The article is cited to several off-line books which appear to have significant coverage of the subject. The nominator has provided no source analysis, and we reasonably have no reason to believe that these sources aren't significant per WP:AGF, Wikipedia:Offline sources, and WP:Verifiability. In short, I am not seeing anything but a personally biased rationale for deletion, rather than a policy based rationale for deletion.4meter4 (talk) 16:42, 15 October 2022 (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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

San Sotheavuth

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

Fails WP:BIO. No reliable sources found and no mention of the subject at the single listed source. 0xDeadbeef 05:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Cambodia. 0xDeadbeef 05:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:31, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:23, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Cannot find any evidence of notability. Does not meet WP:GNG or any other notability standard. —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep /nomination withdrawn. Consensus is clear. Star Mississippi 17:54, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey A. Krames

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

Bringing this here for discussion. While one of his books has a Kirkus review, it appears his titles were published by the publishing company for which he works, rendering neutrality a question. They're not self published, but nor are they independent. I am unable to find other evidence of notability as a businessman or author, many speaker profiles, but they're not independent. Star Mississippi 21:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Authors. Star Mississippi 21:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:NAUTHOR. I found several more book reviews (and in multiple languages) in my university library. See below.4meter4 (talk) 01:37, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kamen, Al (April 12, 2002). "Not Quite Perfect". The Washington Post. p. A29. (review of The Rumsfeld Way)
Steiner, Marijan (2020). "Jeffrey A. Krames, Voditi S Poniznošću: 12 Lekcija Iz Vodstva Pape Franje". Obnovljeni Život. 74 (5): 689. (review of Lead with Humility: 12 Leadership Lessons from Pope Francis)
Rotella, Mark ; Gold, Sarah F ; Andriani, Lynn ; Scharf, Michael ; Chenoweth, Emily (2003). "Review: What the Best CEOs Know: 7 Exceptional Leaders and Their Lessons for Transforming Any Business". Publishers Weekly. 250 (18): 215.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Bristol Lane Voss (2002). "Review: The Rumsfeld Way: Leadership Wisdom of a Battle-Hardened Maverick". The Journal of Business Strategy. 23 (4): 45.
Kennedy, Carol (2005). "Review: Jack Welch and the 4E's of Leadership". Director Magazine. 59 (5): 30.
Jensen, Kristina (2002). "Review: The Jack Welch Lexicon of Leadership: Over 250 Terms, Concepts, Strategies and Initiatives of the Legendary Leader". Quality Management Journal. 9 (3): 68-69.

Keep More sources 1, 2, are available online. Meets the WP:GNG criteria. I can also improve the article and add citations once I get some extra time. Fifthapril (talk) 04:06, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Fifthapril: I'll look to incorporate these into the article. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:20, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Comment—I've started doing some improvement on the article, starting with trimming down the opening para and adding a source. I do think that the article can be kept, but it needs work. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:17, 8 October 2022 (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 11:17, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ronnie Minder

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

All coverage on Minder is related to the Legend of Ben Hall, which has its own article. Not too much more you could expand on this. Uncited biographical information. InvadingInvader (talk) 20:55, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Music. InvadingInvader (talk) 20:55, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Switzerland and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. One of multiple spam articles from SPAs to spring up around the Legend of Ben Hall. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:03, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd, not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The references mention him in long lists and only in connection with the Legend of Ben Hall, and the interview is a primary source. I don't see any other solid google sources, too. --Suitskvarts (talk) 10:16, 9 October 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deejahn

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

The script appears to have broken, and I'd rather not retype my whole rationale, but basically I'm not seeing any independent coverage here. The sources are all fluffy and many of them simply republish words from the subject in first person. If better sources are found we'll need to be careful to ensure independence, given this aggressive self-promotion. Ovinus (talk) 20:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Uganda. Shellwood (talk) 20:17, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The self-promotion is strong with this one. Ugandan sources are not my specialty, but most look non-RS. Oaktree b (talk) 20:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:22, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find anything for this guy. Next Radio (https://nextradio.co.ug/) appears to be a licensed radio station originating its own programming in Kampala, Uganda and could potentially have an article if someone with knowledge of Ugandan media wanted to create one, but there's no mention of Deejahn as a presenter or staff member on its website at a glance. Flip Format (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Legoktm (talk) 05:39, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yitzhak Suknik

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

Semi-procedural nomination. The article has been deleted before (under a different name: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Koza_-_Yitzhak_Suknik), but comparing the current version and the one just after the AfD, I am not convinced WP:G4 applies. In particular, many references have been added and/or substantially improved in terms of formatting. Still, after an (admittedly quick) look at the ref list, there does not seem to be anything that rises to the level of WP:GNG. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Military, Judaism, and Poland. Skynxnex (talk) 13:36, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I can't confirm because I don't have access to all the sources and can't read Yiddish, but I suspect the referencing is now adequate to establish notability. Maproom (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I can read Yiddish (but not Polish) and can confirm that citation #1 Hurbn includes a 2 page biography of the subject on page 219 of the PDF (which corresponds to the actual page citation of 533-4 given in the article). Coverage in the other sources is more fleeting, but given that I wasn't even able to access half of them online I'm relatively comfortable !voting keep on the basis of the strength of the sources I could read. There's OR-ish content where citations to sources describing general conditions or events in the ghetto are tied to claims specifically about Suknik himself, which should be cleaned up, but that's not cause for deletion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Soft keep Article may need a little love and some work on the references but the guy does appear to be notable. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 00:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Napoleon Jinnies

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

Very minor notability for one event only. Bgsu98 (talk) 01:33, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Bgsu98 (talk) 01:33, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:43, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GNG and subject is known for multiple events. The main event is that they were a named and recognized athlete in the Super Bowl, which is a major athletic event. Other sources present this person's biography, they are a named and featured model for a fashion brand, they are a public face of a nonprofit organization in a fundraising campaign, and their dance education and professional background is highlighted. Bluerasberry (talk) 17:45, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (disclaimer: article creator). I agree with Bluerasberry's assessment. I see multiple in-depth profiles about the subject in reliable sources, which means notability is established. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 00:21, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 00:21, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
keep passes WP:GNG with several feature articles. The policy WP:BLP1E allows for exceptions based on specific criteria, and I believe that criteria has been met.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:23, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - besides the sources already in the article, Jinnies received some coverage when he first made the team as well as in advance of the Super Bowl: [14][15]. Although this wouldn't be enough for notability on its own, I think it proves that BLP1E doesn't apply here. Hatman31 (talk) 17:12, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Star Mississippi 19:36, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JiDion

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

Fails WP:NBIO, not notable. Hasn't won any major awards, all he's known for is harassment and haircuts. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 02:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 02:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all I find are sites about as reliable as TMZ saying he's been banned from Twitch. I really don't want to know more about it, it's gossipy nonsense at this point. Well below what we require for GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 03:34, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
He has a Complex piece written about him and is being described as a "YouTube star" in reliable sources such as the New York Post. I will give you that some sources might not be as reliable, but he has enough coverage in sources that are. Célestin Denis (talk) 12:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NBIO clearly states "Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included." No matter the reason he's notable, he has enough coverage in reliable sources. Célestin Denis (talk) 12:03, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Easily passes WP:GNG [16] [17] [18] There exists a very large amount of significant coverage of the subject, a quick google search reveals a large number of sources covering him. W 42 13:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure he can pass WP:GNG but do you think he passes WP:NBIO? Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 05:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NBIO isn't relevant if the subject passes WP:GNG. "People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below." - from WP:NBIO. W 42 12:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete over WP:BLP concerns. Not a fan of having an article on someone of marginal notability that's entirely about their controversies. ~~If there were coverage going deeper into other aspects of his life, I'd reconsider.~~ Ovinus (talk) 20:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is coverage going deeper into other aspects of his life. [19] Célestin Denis (talk) 22:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, that's actually good source. I guess it depends on how the article is balanced. It's just bad optics to have BLPs that are predominantly about controversies. Struck for now, and I'll think about it. Ovinus (talk) 22:36, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:GNG. The nature of his work (i.e. pranks) means that unfortunately the article will be dominated by controversy, but at least in this case it's something that he actively courts. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 18:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are youtubers that are way less relevant than him that have Wikipedia pages. 150.250.82.249 (talk) 15:45, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 7 October 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:18, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dora Serviarian Kuhn

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

non-notable — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, subject fails WP:GNG and the current article appears to be the result of professional interference. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:05, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm glad they (the Grammophone Magazine) called him that, because that's all I can find. Gnewspapers has his name associated various orchestras on tour, nothing rising to GNG standards. Oaktree b (talk) 20:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Let's let this be the last time this article is brought to AFD in 2022. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:26, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Samuels

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NBIO Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 05:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 05:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Subject passes the notability test and was covered by the New York Times, The Guardian, and so many other mainstream news outlets. If Jordan Peterson is not deleted from Wikipedia then calls for Kevin Samuels' deletion smacks of racism and whomever nominated this article for deletion needs to look in the mirror. Kunkuru (talk) 12:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I see many reliable sources about him and his work (on the article and online search). Fad Ariff (talk) 12:20, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are not many kinds of sources that are enough for notability just by themselves, but I think an editorially-written (not paid) obituary in The New York Times is one of them. Nomination fails to make any case for why the situation has changed since the previous kept AfD. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Samuels satisfies Creative professionals-3, with creating a significant body of work on his social media channels with millions of subscribers (as mentioned in the article). Also, nomination fails to make any case for why the situation has changed since the previous kept AfD. 2601:602:B00:B510:956F:89A3:7FF6:E31D (talk) 19:09, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have such a policy for social media personalities unless something has changed recently. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 02:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 19:20, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per above and The Guardian also published a decent length obituary/summary of his career shortly after his death: Taking his advice was like ‘chewing broken glass’: the short life of dating guru Kevin Samuels. Skynxnex (talk) 19:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Oklahoma. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Since "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Samuels appears to have multiple articles primarily about him published in multiple secondary sources independent of each other and the subject. I think the NYT and Guardian obituaries mentioned above are likely enough to establish notability. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 20:17, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Should this count if a majority of the sources are all about his death? Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 02:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If the sources were *only* about his death, WP:BIO1E might apply. But that is not what the sources are. They are full-length obituaries that summarize his life, not merely the one event of his death. They were not published because his manner of death made him famous, but rather because a famous person died. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:33, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: since during his life, Samuels garnered some significant coverage in multiple notable outlets (e.g. BET [20], Newsweek [21], Complex [22], HipHopDX [23], Essence, Yahoo News, Parle) and his death caused wider coverage due to his impact on the internet including the New York Times, NBC News, The Root, Complex, The Daily Beast, and NPR and was featured in talks after his death among famous black women like Vivica Fox [24]. He certainly made a notable mark on black culture.Ramos1990 (talk) 05:41, 30 September 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jacey Normand

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

This minor BBC presenter doesn't appear to meet GNG. None of the sources provided here are independent of the subject. I can find no significant coverage of this person, just references to her presenting different shows and some routine coverage. MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 23:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, News media, United Kingdom, and England. MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 23:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I expected to find some coverage, but there's almost nothing. Jahaza (talk) 00:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete She joined BBC in 2003 but there is no significant coverage available about her. Fifthapril (talk) 04:37, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Television. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. I too could find no independent coverage.4meter4 (talk) 15:35, 5 October 2022 (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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Barde

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

Subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL as he is only notable for participating in party primaries. Might meet notable guidelines when he wins the election, but not now. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 21:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 21:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : it looks like a Too soon due to the reference date.--Gabriel (talk to me ) 04:08, 4 October 2022 (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 13:10, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vishwanath kulkarni

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

Non-notable actor (likely autobio). Draft declined at AfC, but moved (cut & paste) into mainspace by the author. Sources cited don't come even close to establishing notability per WP:GNG and a search finds nothing better. There's no suggestion in the career details of notability per WP:NACTOR either. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:19, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:19, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NACTOR. Is WP:ADMASQ. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Autobiography that does not satisfy acting notability or general notability, and was moved to article space after being declined in draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Has only acted in one series, in which his character didn't have a name. Asparagusus (interaction) 17:10, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Mostly acted in Non - Notable films and doesn't played any significant role in the other notable films. Contributor008 (talk) 08:28, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – no sign of meeting WP:NACTOR or WP:BASIC. --bonadea contributions talk 06:39, 5 October 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:33, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Martin K. A. Morgan

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

Unable to find any significant coverage in independent RS of this individual or his books. (t · c) buidhe 03:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. (t · c) buidhe 03:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP - Established author with published historical works. National Geographic and IGN articles are RS -- Thats Just Great (talk) 03:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The IGN "article" is an interview with one of his coworkers who mentions Morgan twice. Neither independent nor sigcov. The National Geographic is not an article, it's a bio of a contributor which is usually provided by that contributor and not an independent source. Just publishing books does not make someone notable. (t · c) buidhe 03:23, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Added more links to the article. -- Thats Just Great (talk) 18:37, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Still no independent sources provided... (t · c) buidhe 19:37, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He's certainly an expert in this field, and is quoted often, yet the only independent "bio" I was able to find is this, and it barely says anything about him. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would not call that a bio. (t · c) buidhe 22:07, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Alabama. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No evidence that this passes WP:NAUTHOR, never mind WP:NACADEMICS. Thus falls to WP:NBASIC which, again, the sources appear to not reach. Only sources that have even a waft of independence are the bio-page on National Geographic, which turns out to not be independent because its existence indicates the subject is in fact associated with NatGeo; and the IGN story that only references the subject passingly in an interview answer by an affiliated person. -Ljleppan (talk) 08:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What about the two journals that cite his work and the Guardian article. Do they help? -- Thats Just Great (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Two citations are not notability. (t · c) buidhe 23:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Search turns up no RS. Fails WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:53, 5 October 2022 (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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:14, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

John Ewa

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

Likely fails WP:NBIO as someone being arrested and being published in the news as a kidnapper does not mean it qualifies under WP:NBIO and also since it just happened a couple of days ago like also likely fails WP:TOOSOON. Clarkcj12 (talk) 16:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 17:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Nominator's concern clearly falls under WP:BLPCRIME. Article is a biography of one arrest. RS coverage seems to be exclusively about the arrest and high profile perp walk. Not finding RS of this alleged notorious social media kingpin before the event. • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:GNG. Clearly WP:NOTNEWS.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The event of kidnapping did got some coverages but that doesn't makes the event notable enough to have a standalone article on Ewa, a case of WP:TOOSOON. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 12:13, 3 October 2022 (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 'Trainwreck' which turns into a no-consensus article retention. While some of the keep !votes are not policy based, a sock nomination should probably have been thrown out sooner. This can be revisited if an established editor finds merit, and I'd suggest seming an AfD from the very beginning. Star Mississippi 01:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky Bisht

AfDs for this article:

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

~~non notable film maker. Doesn't meet WP:NFILMMAKER ClickWiki (talk) 11:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)~~ sock nomination MER-C 18:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. ClickWiki (talk) 11:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Keep: Lucky Bisht is a screenplay writer in Bollywood has also given security to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Barack Obama and many other VIPs. He is a notable personality in India. The article has enough references which are independent and reliable.Ppp00007 (talk) 15:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC) sock vote Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 20:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Lucky Bisht is a notable Indian personality and a book is being written on his life story by renowned crime writer, Hussain Zaidi. Eventually, the book will be made into a Bollywood movie. All articles has enough references which are independent and reliableIt has enough citations on trusted reliable, independent resources such as:

~~[25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35]~~

~~Jogenderrautela (talk) 15:52, 27 September 2022 (UTC)~~ sock vote Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 20:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Lucky Bisht is a notable personality in India, Best Sniper in an India, Only Lucky Bisht's name from India is mentioned in the List of snipers. Lucky bisht in the top ranking in Google's search engine, Facebook and Instagram have also verified lucky Bisht pages.The article has enough references which are independent and highly reliable, Telangana Today, The New Indian Express, India Today,Pioneer, Times Now, Business Standard, NDTV, Entrepreneur, Free Press Journal, News18, Flipboard, Dainik Jagran, National Herald, Zee News, Mid-Day, Amar Ujala, The Statesman, Outlook, DNA. All these newspapers have articles and they can be trusted.Powerfultample (talk) 16:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC) (sock strike. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:33, 30 September 2022 (UTC))[reply]
But you didn't link to any of the articles you claim he's mentioned in, so these are not useful. You've only given a list of newspaper names. If you can show the actual articles, it would help. Oaktree b (talk) 01:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Lucky Bisht is a notable personality in India. Notable person in Bollywood he starting a Screenplay writer his career. The top articles has enough references which are independent and reliable.Nabutiger123 (talk) 16:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC) sock vote Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 20:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Uttarakhand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lucky Bisht has many socks it appears. Can we at least not copy the same comment from one to the next? Might be notable, I can't judge most of the sources as they are in a local language and the quality of them, I can't assess. Oaktree b (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And the userpages for the above three comments are identical, "I love wikipedia", with no edits outside this article. Very strange. Oaktree b (talk) 19:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm compiling the SPI, I think I have a good idea who the master is. Curbon7 (talk) 20:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Apparantly this is not the first time this rodeo has occurred Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Powerfultample. Curbon7 (talk) 21:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've opened one here [36] Oaktree b (talk) 02:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: meet passes WP:GNG I think this is a notable person, looking at his page, it seems that he is made according to the guideline of wikipedia on which there are many reliable sources which can be trusted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VIJAY CHAND THAKUR (talk • contribs) 12:56, 28 September 2022 (UTC) sock vote Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 20:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Now that we've pulled the socks, I'm not seeing much that warrants keeping the article, interesting gentlemen for sure, non-notable for wiki however. Trivial mentions or non-RS. Oaktree b (talk) 01:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Lucky Bisht is not an actor; he was a former Indian spy and NSG commando. These unbiased, trustworthy sources are included below as proof that he has served his country very well.

Times Now [37]

Entrepreneur [38]

Free Press Journal [39]

Flipboard [40]

Indian Express [41]

~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santoshbeats (talk • contribs) 15:59, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Lucky Bisht is an former Indian NSG Commando and Spy. He was Bodyguard of Narendra Modi, Rajnath Singh, Parkash Singh Badal, Chandra Babu Naidu, Tarun Gogoi and L. K. Advani. He joined Special forces at only age of 16 in 2003. This makes him notable and The famous Author Hussain Zaidi is writing a story on the Life of Bisht. He is also Producer in Bollywood. He passes WP:GNG and WP:NFILMMAKER both. He has been Featured and Mentioned in many Reliable Sources. ---- Bhumihaar (talk) 09:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am not convinced that the subject meets WP:GNG; sources that include him are only passing mentions, and I can't see a reliable source that provides WP:SIGCOV. Curbon7 (talk) 21:36, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The high degree of sock/SPA activity in this AfD is astonishing. Curbon7 (talk) 21:37, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Keep- This discussion seems a bit messed up as there seems to be SPA activities happening over here. Due to SPA's I was tempted to vote a delete, but as I did a bit of digging and per sources his name is associated with Narendra Modi and he is among top global leaders so I did found Reliable Independent Indepth sources in English and Mostly in Hindi too that not only has authors but were written from NPOV. The fact that he has been part of NSG and has served Narendra Modi and later he gained significant media attention (per WP:SIGCOV) there are sources like [42] this,[43] this Pioneer Group piece [44] this NDTV article, [45] this, and [46] this, also found this [47] piece where it reads Hussain Zaidi is writing his bio pic.

Apart from that I also found [48] this piece of article that does mention him as a commando, Socks might be the reason if this page gets deleted but the fact about his notability for being NSG commando and being associated with Narendra Modi and later getting into entertainment Industry can't be denied so its a Soft Keep for me.

I cleaned up the article a bit and removed few unreliable sources. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 14:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Being associated with someone famous doesn't make a person notable. Otherwise, we'd have an article on every celebrity's bodyguard, dogwalker and dry cleaner. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well That does makes sense, But I don't think all the bodyguards, dogwalkers and dry cleaners tend to get a Book Written on em alongside the Biopic being announced by a Notable Author like Hussain Zaidi, as these sources reflects. see [49] this & [50] this. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 09:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- He qualify (per WP:SIGCOV) WP:GNG. He has received a notable award as India's Best National Security Guard (NSG) Commando in 2009 and also associated with Prime Minister Narendra Modi etc see[51]Biopic being written about him by prolific writer Hussain Zaidi see [52][53]The subject has also been written in Hindi languages from an independent and reliable sources. See[54][55][56]A film/ Movie is currently been scripted about his life/ journey see[57]NPOV source on Film see[58]Bernice2019 (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think some might criticize this relisting but right now, I'm seeing "No consensus" and I think an extra week might result in a more conclusive closure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:02, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Generally commandos in secret units don't blare their accomplishments out and try to cash in Clancy-style because the point is to remain secret. WP:RESUME if there ever was a perfect example of the worst type of this article. Nate • (chatter) 01:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment- Commando units are not secret, they are a part of the military of any country, where those people are selected, live physical and mental power is good, for example this is a commando unit National Security Guard, Para (Special Forces), Commando Battalion for Resolute Action, MARCOS, it is not a secret, secret units are available in any The country has intelligent wings, for example it is Intelligence Bureau (India). I think keep for me there are available reliable Sourcess that satisfies wp:basic and wp:sigcov 02:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)~
Hitfit9999 (talk) 02:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- An article is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone. when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. WP:SIGCOV. There are available existing sources that proves he qualifies. It a keep for me. I have done some copyediting on the article and removed PR or advertising contents and also removed some sources that are irrelevants aswell.Bernice2019 (talk) 21:06, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- His positions as a National Security Guard and a Research and Analysis Wing Agent where he was termed as Agent Lima where he has been part of several secret missions and his imprisonment where he was later given clean chit by the court see this [59] and as per above presented refs by Bernice2019 and this 4 days old reference [60] his association with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Hussain Zaidi writing his Biopic these things are well sufficient to pass WP:Notability. Spider1217 (talk) 07:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- This is one of the controversial AFD discussions I’ve ever encountered, from my experience in AFD I think this article is worth encyclopedic not because of the present of the references provided, but seemingly it passes WP:NEXIST, I always use to support this kind of articles, I always suggest that this kind of article shouldn’t be left deleted because one way or the other it will be created in the near future, moreover, we have to consider the large number of references used in the article to support every single information provided, though someone said it is a pass mentioning, but as I see that the person is a public figure in India. An@ss_koko^{(speak up)} 08:11, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bisht passes the WP:GNG as he received the award and he has significant coverage in media. Sources cited belong to NDTV India, Outlook, New Indian Express, Free Press Journal which are reliable, secondary and independent, fulfilling the WP:RS criteria.—Sankoswal (talk) 11:39, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. It looks like the article has undergone substantial changes since te nomination to remedy some of the nominator's points. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pranav Pandya (AWGP)

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

Thanks to the stupid WP:DRAFTOBJECT rule, seriously problematic articles can only be draftified once, and then need an AfD or some lame problem tags.

First award, fake. The UK parliament doesn't give this award, some obscure private organisation does.

Second award, probably fake, no actual evidence for this and unlikely that NASA would give awards for being a "reformer of Indian culture".

Third Award, some "Federation of Indian Association" would have named him "Hindu of the Year". This claim is repeated on many pages[61]. Strangely, this award seems not to have been given to anyone else, ever[62]

AfD is not cleanup, but how untrustworthy and dubious does an article have to be before draftifying or WP:TNT is the only solution? Fram (talk) 07:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion, and India. Fram (talk) 07:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with User:Fram that he doesn't got first 3 awards or honors but without any award and honor he is notable. As he is the head of religious organization AWGP which is the International Religious Organization and also member of the International Movement Yug Nirman Yojna. Contributor008 (talk) 08:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then why didn't you correct this after I moved it draftspace for exactly this reason (dubious awards)? Fram (talk) 08:18, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Sorry, Now I have corrected it. Contributor008 (talk) 10:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it's good that the dubious awards have been removed, but the sourcing here is actually exceptionally good including 2 academic articles (one from the Journal of the American Academy of Religion) and an article from The Hindu. Jahaza (talk) 16:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jahaza Pandya has been the subject of multiple scholarly and news articles. W 42 13:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- the sources available meets GNG clearly. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 14:52, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:33, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Guy of Nantes

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

No sources (and since 2007 there has been no sources), little proven notability, unsure if this is a hoax. InvadingInvader (talk) 04:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. InvadingInvader (talk) 04:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The de.wiki article has an extensive literature section, and the fr.wiki article cites sources. In addition a Google search satisfies me that this is not a hoax, with mentions here, where he appears as both Guido and Wido, mentions in this work where I can only see the index, and in footnote 3 here where he also appears as Wido. Mccapra (talk) 05:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Royalty and nobility. Shellwood (talk) 07:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. WP:BEFORE fail. Srnec (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I'm not gonna slam on the nominator for no doing a WP:BEFORE, but the sources extant in other language versions and his holding of notability-conferring positions demonstrate that this is thus a notable subject. Instead of dunking on the nominator, the nominator should be congratulated for bringing to attention an article in sore need of improvement. Curbon7 (talk) 20:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The majority of our articles on French noblemen and historical politicians look just like this; mostly or completely uncited with just a link to a different language version. It's quite sad honestly. Curbon7 (talk) 20:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- The article is not unsourced, as it quotes from primary sources. The problem is that the precise references for the quotations are not given, but that should be capable of being remedied, probably from fr.wiki. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:47, 2 October 2022 (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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 05:42, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Padé (DJ)

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 01:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 01:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I have notified the page creator of COI. Their entire edit history seems to relate to this individual. No comment with regard to AfD. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:44, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:16, 11 October 2022 (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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Luca Moreira

AfDs for this article:

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

This is another serious case of WP:SOAPBOX and also (likely) WP:PAID. This article is a WP:PIG, full of unreliable sources and paid articles to create the impression that this person is notable, but he isn't. I can analyze source by source, but I can tell you people, that this article can only "deceive" those who don't speak Portuguese. I can tell you this, because in the Pt.WP, this article was not only deleted, but also salted after several SOCKs tried to recreate it over and over. The person behind these attempts, created numerous accounts, and the master account (ironically called "Lucamoreira") had to be blocked and globally locked. This is even more serious, because all this accounts and this article are linked to the BreakTudo Awards. Several people, paid for this organization, tried to use WP to promote their awards and the people linked to them. It is easy to determine that the creator of this article is linked to this organization, by simply looking into their talk page. Every time someone tries to delete one of their article, the process is plagued by several new accounts (many of them SOCKs or MEATs) voting to keep the article. That happened here both times their main article, BreakTudo Awards, went thought a AfD (see the first AfD and the second AfD) and also in the Pt.WP (See that the main account trying to recreate it in pt.WP was a SOCK). Again, none of the references in this article are from reliable sources. Additionally, many of them are simply paid articles that use the same pictures and also the same/similar text. Also, don't be surprised if this AfD is "invaded" by several new accounts, desperately voting for this article to be kept. This is what happens whenever one of the BreakTudo Awards-related articles goes through an AfD. Moreover, it's important to notice that this article went through an AfD before, and was deleted (see here). Kacamata! ^Dimmi!!! 01:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Brazil. Kacamata! ^Dimmi!!! 01:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per pretty blatant and persistent WP:NOTHERE by whoever *really* wants this article to exist. BrigadierG (talk) 01:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, noting the sock activity and sourcing concerns brought up by nom (whose evaluation of Portuguese sources I trust far more than whatever I can do with Google Translate). I did I run sources [2] and [3] through translate and they seem vaguely effusive, although the post-translation grammar is suboptimal. Ovinus (talk) 02:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with source assessment above. Oaktree b (talk) 12:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Journalism. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with nominator’s source assessment. NMasiha (talk) 20:08, 3 October 2022 (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. I don't find that the keep arguments successfully rebut the detailed source analysis. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Karl Lagasse

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

A highly promotional article that seems to be either an autobiography or possibly UPE. I spent a good part of the morning trying to unpack what substantial coverage I might find from the press releases, calendar listings, user-submitted content, primary sourcing and the like. There is not much left to substantiate notability; the closest thing is the Austin American-Statesman piece on a gallery he opened in Austin to sell his own work. However part of that article is press release material. A BEFORE search reveals his own website claiming he is a "Renowned Artist and Top 10 Sculptor in the World"[63] in ALL CAPS!; social media, auction listings, art sales sites to buy his "one dollar sculptures" or NFTs, but no serious reviews of exhibitions, art historical critical analysis or what we would normally find for a notable artist. It seems that the article is unambiguous advertising WP:ADMASQ for an artist who does not pass WP:GNG nor WP:NARTIST. Source analysis chart below. Bringing it here for the community to decide.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
midlibre	Press release or paid placement		Press release, no byline, includes his phone number at bottom	✘ No
TotemMagazine.com	User submitted content	user submitted content	user-submitted, not journalism	✘ No
Marbella rocks	primary source, interview	? unknown, defunct lifestyle magazine; seems like native advertising	~ small editorial introduction taken from his website	✘ No
Artistic Rezo	Press release	? press release	press release for a workshop	✘ No
Galerie St. Martin	His gallery bio, with a link to "reserve a work" (for sale)	Gallery PR for sales of art	Promo	✘ No
Yahoo news		?	One sentence about a work he donated to a fundraising auction	✘ No
Ouest France	~ press release, calendar listing	~ press release about a sculpture he donated	One sentence calendar listing press release	✘ No
RTBF	? no byline; press release	?	name mention, the press release is about Maserati	✘ No
Over Blog	? blog, unknown if it is user-submitted content	blog, click-bait	? has a video and some photos	✘ No
France Culture			photo caption - trivial	✘ No
La Ventana del Arte	It's a press tease from his gallery for sales	? press release	press release, not journalism or a review	✘ No
Le Parisien			name is mentioned once in a sentence along with other artists in an auction	✘ No
Art Premium	?	?	? dead link	? Unknown
Paris Match	~ contains some boiler plate PR content	? Probably, PM is sometimes considered light-weight celebrity gossip, but it may be reliable	about a trophy he designed, about half of it is boiler plate press release content	? Unknown
Phillips auction house	auction house	auction house listing of a sale	sales listing	✘ No
Decentraland	user submitted online "virtual gallery"	user-generated content	UGC for a 4 hour event to sell his NFTs	✘ No
Austin American-Statesman	newspaper	has byline, editorial oversight	~ Some actual reportage here, but a large amount of boiler plate press release content	~ Partial
Karl Lagasse personal website	the artists personal website	artist's personal website	primary source	✘ No
Decentraland	user-generated content website event listing	user-submitted calendar listing	user-submitted content calendar listing for sales event	✘ No
ArtPrice.com by ArtMarket	pay-to-play "Art Market Trends" website	user-submitted pay-to-play website	120,000 artist biographies and 30 million auction records	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Netherzone (talk) 17:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Visual arts, France, and Texas. Netherzone (talk) 17:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the wonderful source analysis above. Non-notable. Oaktree b (talk) 19:30, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete wow, I'm going to start providing this analysis in future AfDs. I did look for more sources and I found one weak source which is an interview with the Armenian Mirror-Spectator but it's quite short and doesn't support notability very well. This additional source was not enough for me to change my vote. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 20:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article as written is WP:PROMO and the original creator 3d.nftart is a one topic editor. Lagasse has a number of pieces listed on ArtNet. I don't know what the deal is with NFTs, but he doesn't seem to be selling any of them. Leaning towards delete. He isn't in any collections or been included in exhibitions of notable museums. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:57, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, WomenArtistUpdates, ArtNet is a marketing website and database for art auction sales, which does contribute to notability (no different than a listing). It is "place to buy, sell, and research art online." However ArtNet News is a different part of the same site with news items with bylines, and editorial oversight; there is a discussion in the archives of WP:RSP stating the news items can be reliable. I think it's important to keep in mind that any artist or gallery can pay ArtNet/ArtNet News for a "home page" subscription, so the site also contains user-submitted/user-generated content. I've always been somewhat on the fence whether or not we should use the news site, but I feel the database is not very useful for what we do here at WP. Netherzone (talk) 15:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Netherzone, Thanks for the ping. I didn't mean to imply that ArtNet was a RS for proving notability. I did think it was interesting that that were so many entries and it gave me pause. I am so out of tune with 21st century artists I just wondered if I was missing something. After looking at the article yet again and reviewing your source analysis, I realize that it is truly is a very slick piece of promotion. Best, WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:NARTIST. He isn't in any collections or been included in exhibitions of notable museums. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A search turned up multiple reliable sources, which clearly show notability, with several of those sources already in the article. The article is overwritten and in need of paring down, some of which I have done, but that does not negate the reliable sources in the article that do show notability. The sales sites erroneously included in the article can easily be removed. Meets WP:GNG and passes WP:NARTIST. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 06:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly passes WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST with multiple independent sources with significant coverage. These are already cited in the article or in the French language wikipedia article Fr:Karl Lagasse. Some of the RS from the French wiki page was not included in the source analysis above. That said, the article is horribly written and overly promotional and needs a thorough re-write or at least a trimming down to bare essentials. AfD is not cleanup.4meter4 (talk) 00:27, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would help if those advocating Keep either contested the Source assessment table or mentioned the additional sources they have located which would count towards establishing GNG.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Source assessment table demonstrates a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Not seeing any convincing rebuttal from keep voters. MaxnaCarta (talk) 03:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @4meter4: - could you provide examples of RS from the French Wikipedia page?-KH-1 (talk) 02:25, 11 October 2022 (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 no consensus. Star Mississippi 17:18, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shirin Taylor

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

Was recently undeleted after a PROD, but I see no coverage anywhere in RS's. Based on my read of her IMDB page, I'm not sure the "significant roles" of WP:NACTOR is met. Alyo (chat·edits) 23:51, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Alyo (chat·edits) 23:51, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lots of hits in GBooks for Doctor Who, it looks like a bit part. Nothing notable found. Oaktree b (talk) 00:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I did go over her IMDb credits. She is a veteran British actress with leading roles in numerous TV series, which the article in its present state only mentions one. The problem of finding references in 2022 is that most of her roles happened pre-Internet and so there may be many newspaper, magazine, and TV interviews from back then that have not made it online. You would have to delete the Wiki bios of many otherwise famous character actors of old Hollywood for the same reason of limited references. Her article needs a table list of her credits, which could help and inspire researchers in the UK to find references. 5Q5|^✉ 10:39, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems to have had some significant roles, eg in Coronation Street; replaced Julie Walters in the title role of Education Rita on stage. Some more details at the British Film Institute, Theatricalia and Who's who on television Piecesofuk (talk) 15:32, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Article has been updated considerably to show many TV roles, notable ones being in soap operas and sitcoms. Newspaper references have been added regarding theatre work (Educating Rita, replacing Julie Walters). Better than what it was before.Silurian25 (talk) 07:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I did an in depth search of newspapers.com and found no significant coverage in reliable sources. Coverage was limited to tabloids and one line mentions even for British print media of the 1980s and 1990s. W 42 21:31, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The newspapers.com hits would seem to indicate there was significant coverage of the subject in the 1980s and '90s—more than merely listing her name in credits. For the reasons above, I believe this article should remain. Dflaw4 (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2022 (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 02:48, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Akinola Pedro

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

Fails WP:SINGER. They might pass part 10 of WP:SINGER but it's a pretty weak case. Searched Google and wasn't able to find new information but this isn't my area of expertise so if someone can point me a better direction add it as a comment and I'll go looking for it. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 19:44, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, and Bands and musicians. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 19:44, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I suppose if the song was used prominently in the video game, I'd give it a pass under part 10 of ~~MUSIC~~ SINGER, simply having a song on an album isn't enough, based on how I read it. I've not played the game so I can't comment how prominently it's featured. Oaktree b (talk) 19:50, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very little significant, independent, and reliable coverage beyond the local news TV interview of the single event of him being one of 10 out of 10,000 to win a spot on the game's soundtrack. Uhai (talk) 10:56, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The DCTop20 artist profile of him appears to be legitimate coverage at first, but looking closer it's a promotional company for artists that he's likely paying (see here), so any of its content is not independent or reliable.
The Hype Magazine source gives conflicting information regarding the contest, saying that it was 8 tracks selected out of 20,000 instead of 10 out of 10,000, so I'm not inclined to say it's reliable.
The HipHopDX article is just two paragraphs, one of which is just a quotation, so it's not really significant or independent.
The local news TV interview also states it was 20,000 submissions but the offical NBA 2K YouTube video description states 10 out of 10,000 so that's what I'm taking as the source of truth.

Additionally, from what I was able to learn (here), his track wasn't even part of the original soundtrack of the game but was added to the game later alongside other tracks with updates to the game. To me, this doesn't even qualify him for WP:SINGER #10. The claim that he also has a track on the NBA 2K21 "next gen soundtrack" (which is, again, a collection of additional tracks that are not part of the original 2K21 soundtrack) appears completely unsubstantiated as I could find nothing that supports this beyond his own LinkedIn page. Uhai (talk) 10:56, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 02:42, 7 October 2022 (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 11:27, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Samrat Yaduvanshi

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

Fails WP:NACTOR, fails WP:NFILMMAKER, fails WP:NMUSICIAN, fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Do I really need to say that he fails WP:GNG? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:54, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Politicians, and India. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:54, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Was on the point of nominating this myself when removing AfC tag in mainspace. Delete per nom. Eagleash (talk) 17:29, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article need to be published. Most of the cite are named as anil samrat. As anil samrat and samrat yaduvanshi is the same person. Anil samrat has now changed his name to samrat Yaduvanshi as per numerology. Avanish kumar8271 (talk) 19:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC) copied friom the creating editor's talk page. I believe this must be interpreted as a request to Keep the article. I present this without commentary. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can only see Facebook page and TikTok page from Google but nothing worthy from it. Ashavawani (talk) 12:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:09, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gus McLeod

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

Notability is questionable. Lots of statements without any supporting sources or citations. Bgsu98 (talk) 04:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Bgsu98 (talk) 04:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Mississippi. Shellwood (talk) 08:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well he has been twice on television, and he has written a book. Sounds kinda notable to me.Wjhonson (talk) 19:44, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Neither the current state of the article, nor appearing twice on television are reasons to delete or keep. Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. Although this article definitely needs improvement, the subject surpasses General Notability Guidelines. His adventures have received significant coverage from multiple independent, reliable sources over a period of time.^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]^[7]^[8]^[9] These are just a handful of news sources covering his journeys, and they don't even include his reality show appearances or potential reviews of his book. McLeod is also currently executive director of the Glenn L. Martin Maryland Aviation Museum.^[10] In short, ample sources exist for composing a neutral, well-written, policy-compliant article, even if it's only a few paragraphs. --Animalparty! (talk) 05:34, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:50, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He is notable [1], [2] and meets the notability criteria. Fifthapril (talk) 06:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He appears to meet the notability guidelines and have sufficient citations and RS references to merit an article. Go4thProsper (talk) 20:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Lang, John (December 26, 1999). "Amateur pilot answering the call of the Arctic plans to challenge north pole in biplane". The Star-Ledger. p. 36 – via NewsBank.
^ Ruane, Michael E. (April 5, 2000). "Death and Daring". Washington Post. p. B1.
^ McCord, Joel (May 2, 2000). "After frigid flight, aviator met with warm reception; Pilot reached North Pole after journey in open plane". Baltimore Sun.
^ Boin, Sonia (May 6, 2000). "Polar pilot tells of pain, near-death experiences". The Frederick News-Post.
^ McCord, Joel (April 6, 2000). "Weather slowing North Pole explorer; Snow in Ontario stalls open-cockpit pilot". Baltimore Sun.
^ Andes, Jennifer (April 27, 2000). "Pilot makes Pole trip - in open cockpit - Aircraft, ashes of friend left behind in Arctic". The Seattle Times. p. A7 – via NewsBank.
^ Bonner, Paul (June 4, 2000). "Adventurer to bare polar tale on TV". The Herald-Sun. p. B1 – via NewsBank.
^ Dunkel, Tom (January 8, 2004). "Adventure Mode". Baltimore Sun. p. 1D.
^ Talcott, Christina (January 6, 2005). "After a Record-Setting Voyage, Trying to Inspire More to Soar". Washington Post.
^ Dillard, Demetrius (July 13, 2022). "Martin Museum presents veteran astronaut Tom Jones in latest speaker program". The Avenue News.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. --Animalparty! (talk) 18:37, 21 September 2022 (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. There is obvious meat puppetry going on here and none of the keep votes stacked up against a devastating source analysis. If this gets recreated please ping me to look into the possibility of further coi editing Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:00, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vaibhav Vinay Maloo

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Quoting User:Smalljim's nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vaibhav Maloo (2nd nomination):

Despite appearances, there is nothing to show notability here. Although the article has been re-worked since the previous AfD, all the references are either passing mentions, or don't mention the subject, or are not independent. There is no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject as required by WP:BIO or WP:N.

Some of the sources are newer, but it's the same mix of obvious paid puff pieces, press releases, passing mentions, and doesn't-even-mention-hims. His company and his father might be notable, but notability is not inherited on Wikipedia. Editors searching for any significant, independent coverage I might have missed, please note that his name is commonly spelled Vaibhav Maloo, which was salted following repeated deletion and sockpuppetry. Storchy (talk) 13:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. Storchy (talk) 13:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even with the alt spelling given above, it's still puff pieces. Delete. Oaktree b (talk) 15:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : The article was previously deleted in 2014, which is 8 years before. Lot of events happened after that and the subject has become director and founder of many BSE listed multi billion turnover companies after that and has recieved many prestigious awards after that. Morover many new significant news references were introduced to prove the notability. There is no press release articles in the set of references. Only significant sources were added. The deleted page was create protected so it was recreated in his alternate name Jehowahyereh (talk) 15:21, 19 September 2022 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Jehowahyereh (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]
please provide sources for these wins, what's given in the article isn't sufficient. Oaktree b (talk) 17:23, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment : A number of featured and reliable news references are added including Zee News, NewsX, Businessworld, The Pioneer (India), CEO Magazine etc which proves notability of the subject. Jehowahyereh (talk) 05:09, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jehowahyereh: as noted in the nomination, all the references are either passing mentions, or don't mention the subject, or are not independent. A pile of passing mentions in reliable sources does not confer notability: we need to see significant coverage, from independent, reliable sources, not passing mentions in reliable ones, along with obvious paid puffery. Storchy (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As User Jehowahyereh said. Contributor008 (talk) 09:19, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please see my reply above to article creator Jehowahyereh's assertions. 09:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Comment - here's a source analysis:
- "ENSO Group's Vaibhav Maloo opens up on growth of young businesses and startups". 9 September 2022.: press release in barely comprehensible English, dated "Oct 09, 2022, 12:37 AM IST", which was 33 min prior to its addition as a reference by a busy anonymous editor. The conflict of interest is fairly obvious here.
- "A Long-term View: Vaibhav Maloo". The CEO Magazine.: adulatory interview by coffee table mag "The CEO Magazine", not a WP:SECONDARY source.
- "THE NEXT GENERATION LEADER OF ENSO". Daily Guardian.: obvious paid puff piece from a blog pretending to be a newspaper. "We accept sponsored blog posts and SaaS product reviews on Thedailyguardian.com . This is a business and marketing blog for entrepreneurs, and business brands."
- "Meet Vaibhav Maloo, A Visionary, Progressive Thinker, And Change-Maker In The World Of Business". Outlook (Indian magazine).: another obvious paid puff piece with no byline, from a paper that freely mixes real journalism with churnalism
- "Vaibhav Vinay Maloo is the Youth Icon Of The Year 2021". news24hours.in.: obvious paid puffery from a zero-value news blog "news24hours.in", nothing to do with News 24 (Indian TV channel), WP:BLOGS are not reliable sources
- "How Corporate giants are making healthcare better, expert Vaibhav Maloo explains". Zee News.: Zee News is reliable, but this is simply a very short interview, and therefore a WP:PRIMARY source.
- "Straight talk with Mr. Vaibhav Maloo". NewsX. Archived from the original on 2022-02-18.: I had to rescue this using archive.org, as the reference has been dead for months, so the article creator clearly didn't bother reading it before adding. It's another short interview, and therefore a WP:PRIMARY source.
- "Charting A Success Story That Can Inspire Future Generations, Make Way For Ace Business Personality Vaibhav Maloo". Hindustan Herald.: another obvious paid puff piece from a blog pretending to be a newspaper
- "Vaibhav Maloo, as an influential entrepreneur and MD of Enso Group, puts light on the corporate giant's role in healthcare". The Pioneer.: The Pioneer (India)'s own reporting is reliable, but they also carry press releases like this one. It's a WP:SPS, by author "Agencies", and therefore not an independent and reliable source.
- "UK based Enso group tries to get back cambay basin block". The Asian Age.: a reliable source, but the article is about his company, and he's only mentioned in passing.
- ""Sustainable Resources, Sustainable Future", In Conversation With Industrialist Vaibhav Maloo". Business World.: another interview, not a WP:SECONDARY source.
- "Vaibhav Maloo: Leading Tremendous Reforms In Supply Chain Management". CEO Insights India.: obvious paid puff piece interview from "ceoinsightsindia.com", a zero-value blog
- https://asiaone.co.in/vaibhav-maloo-2/: another paid puff piece with adulatory interview, from "Asia One magazine", an awards mill, dated 26 September, a week after AFD nomination.
- "John Abraham at the second edition of Godrej Eon Tour De India 2013 in Mumbai". Times of India.: he's only mentioned in passing as attending, in a promo article about a cycling event
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/more-sports/cycling/tour-de-india-gets-recognised-by-uci/articleshow/26640497.cms: also doesn't mention him, but in this case doesn't even mention his company
- "Godrej Eon Tour De India 2013 kicks off its second edition in Mumbai". APN News.: he's only mentioned in passing in a promo article about a cycling event
- "Maharashtra Punjab Try PPP Model In Diagnostic Facilities". Businessworld., article about Enso Group, and he's only mentioned in passing
- "GE sees big bets in government healthcare projects". DNA India.: article about GE, his company gets a brief mention, then he's mentioned in passing
- "Maloo's back with oil, core focus". The Economic Times.: article about his father; Vaibhav Maloo is only mentioned in passing toward the end
- "Vaibhav Maloo & Krishna Kant ceases as directors of Asian Oilfield Services". India Infoline.: single-sentence press release about him ceasing to be a director
- "Platinum Ocean Enery Annual Report" (PDF). MoneyControl.: Annual company report, lists his position as a director, not a WP:SECONDARY source
- "Making Slow and Steady Changes To Status Quo Accelerates Business Growth". Jouneysuccessstories.: obvious paid puffery from "journeysuccessstories.com"
- "GE Technology powers Government of Maharashtra's PPP initiative in Healthcare". GE.: press release from partner company GE about their project, which only mentions him in passing
- "22 district hospitals to be upgraded with advanced diagnostic imaging facilities | Mumbai News - Times of India". The Times of India.: article about his company, only mentions him in passing
- "GE, Ensocare partner with Maharashtra Government for diagnostic facilities". 17 May 2013 – via The Economic Times.: another article about his company, appears to be a press release, mentions him only in passing
- Wadke, P. T. Jyothi Datta & Rahul. "Maharashtra, 2 private firms to set up Rs 150-crore diagnostics project". @businessline.: article about his company, doesn't mention him
- "Medtech Giants Philips and GE Fight Over India". Forbes India.: article about GE, mentions his company, doesn't mention him
- "Ensocare and Wipro GE Healthcare enter into a Public Private Partnership with Government of Maharashtra to upgrade District Hospitals".: press release about his company, quotes him in passing
- Market, Capital (March 19, 2021). "Strides' biopharma arm partners RDIF to supply COVID-19 vaccine" – via Business Standard.: article about another company, mentions his company in passing, doesn't mention him
- Writer, Staff (March 19, 2021). "COVID-19 vaccine: Strides Pharma to produce 200 million doses of Sputnik V". mint.: article about another company, mentions his company in passing, doesn't mention him
- "Stelis Biopharma to make 200 mn doses of Sputnik V Covid vaccine". Hindustan Times. March 19, 2021.: article about another company, mentions his company in passing, doesn't mention him
- "RDIF, Stelis Biopharma partner to supply 200 mn doses of Sputnik V vaccine".: article about another company, mentions his company in passing, doesn't mention him
- "'Health check-ups help in early detection of diseases'". The Hindu.: article about COVID, quotes him in passing
- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/companies/wockhardt-enso-health-join-hands-for-sputnik-jabs/articleshow/85312466.cms: short newsflash about his company, doesn't mention him
- "Jet Airways buyout: Russian state-owned fund expresses interest in bankrupt airliner". Financial Express.: article about a sale involving his company, mentions him in passing
- "10 Best Leaders In Oil & Gas - 2021". CEO Insights India.: list of leaders with no indication of inclusion criteria. He's simply an entry in the list, with a link to the ceoinsightsindia.com puff piece described above
- "14th Edition Asia-Africa Business and Social Forum: Awards & Business E-Summit & Greatest Brands and Leaders 2020-21– Asia, Middle East & Africa". Vinodsekhar.com.: apparently affiliated with the "Asia One" awards mill above, here he's an entry in a list of hundreds of businesspeople, with no indication of inclusion criteria
- "Evolution With Time Is Necessary". IAFIndia.: a very short "achiever's success story" from the "Indian Achievers Forum", no indication of the notability of this award, or whether one can nominate oneself
- "Congratulations to " Mr. Vaibhav Maloo (Managing Director at ENSO Group) "". YouTube -The Global Choice Awards.: another "achiever's success story" from the "Global Choice Awards", no indication of the notability of this award, or whether one can nominate oneself

I hope this is helpful to editors wading through the references to determine whether his notability has increased since the last deletion. Storchy (talk) 11:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Please review Storchy's source analysis just added today to the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:57, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The source analysis above just proves it's more of nothing. "Man says xyz" is not a good citation, 20 of them doesn't help. Oaktree b (talk) 23:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Enso Group per WP:ATD. The source analysis above is convincing; subject fails WP:SIGCOV. Clearly a case of WP:REFBOMBing.4meter4 (talk) 02:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Added couple of secondary news sources as suggested from Daily Guardian and Outlook India, thus passes notability Jehowahyereh (talk) 11:38, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neither is a secondary source. The first is a marketing blog, and the second is an obvious paid puff piece with no byline. I've added both to the source analysis above. This must be costing someone a fortune in fees. Storchy (talk) 11:41, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you sees every references as puff pieces. The Daily Guardian is definetly a news paper. Here is the epaper link of it https://epaper.thedailyguardian.com/ and its showing as correspondant written the article and not any sponsored disclaimer is seen in the article. About Outlook India magazine, it is a reputed Indian Magazine and there is no sponsered disclaimer in that article also Jehowahyereh (talk) 12:38, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The CEO Magazine article is a mix of quoting his words and what the journalist understands. Thus definetly can be considered as a secondary source. Jehowahyereh (talk) 12:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That Daily Guardian website also says "We accept sponsored blog posts and SaaS product reviews on Thedailyguardian.com . This is a business and marketing blog for entrepreneurs, and business brands."

Outlook India likewise carries both real journalism and puff pieces. In this case, there is a very clear disclaimer, "OUTLOOK FOR BRANDS", at the top. If you have a browse through WP:RSP, you'll see that there are many well known papers and magazines that carry sponsored content. On Wikipedia, WP:SPONSORED content is not considered a reliable source. Storchy (talk) 12:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Daily Guardian article is not a sponsored one as it says written by correspondand and no tags/ disclaimer found. It is definitely a secondary source. The Outlook India article comes under the Business Spotlight section and Outlook for Brands doesn't represent any sponsored news instead its a section representing news related to Brands. It cannot be summoned as a sponsored article either Jehowahyereh (talk) 15:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment An anonymous editor has been busy WP:CITEBOMBing this article with very recent press releases (one dated only 33 minutes before addition to the article). Source analysis updated. Storchy (talk) 08:57, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have gone through the news reference https://www.cnbctv18.com/pti/enso-groups-vaibhav-maloo-opens-up-on-growth-of-young-businesses-and-startups-14897031.htm added by someone from some IP ID. There is no such rule in wiki that any recent news article can't be added as reference. The news article seems credible to me as it says by CNBCTV18 . The news is provided by Press Trust of India, which is a nonprofit organisation Jehowahyereh (talk) 09:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, there's no rule against adding a half-hour old press release to the bio of a businessman. It's just bloody odd. Here's a quote from that totally credible reference:Vaibhav sees to cherishing the high-techs and ways to improve the management techniques to win the race. Claiming a flexible mindset, he asserts, “The technique of surgical operator helps him with the ability to execute tasks with minimal recurring costs and lighter books.”

Yeah, seems legit. 😀 Storchy (talk) 09:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : Comments are too harsh, and some comments are undermining all of Indian media, and his notability is clear. Article should be cleaned up and diverted to "Vaibhav Maloo" as there are multiple sources for the same facts. Nuttyprofessor2016 (talk)

Reviewing admins, please note that Nuttyprofessor2016's edits to date have been almost exclusively on Draft:Vaibhav Maloo, requests for unprotection of salted Vaibhav Maloo (for which this source analysis by User:Jéské Couriano is eerily close to mine above), Vinay Maloo, Enso Group, and other directly connected articles. Not quite a single-purpose account, but damn close. Storchy (talk) 15:32, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : All of the sources seem to be puff pieces. Definitely fails WP:GNG. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 18:04, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I checked out the source analysis by Storchy. About [64] I am not convinced why he rejected the link and did not accept it as RS. I don not understand why the date of publishing is the matter fr him! About [65], You are right the portal accept sponsors for publish paid articles but important point is on sponsored post you will know that as it will be show up on link of article (https://thedailyguardian.com/sponsered/...) or sponsored tag will be show p at the top of article. Therefore only because of the portal accepted sponsors, we can not rejected it as unreliable source. Many of reliable and independent portals has sponsors. About [66], as you mentioned its reliable and short interview but alongside withe other sources it will be helpful to establish notability. With all due my respect I don not believe in your source analysis because your provided reason is with the purpose of rejecting! About reliable press you claimed that are short! about significant coverage you claimed they are unreliable because of date of publishing or accepting sponsors and ect. Anyway as an entrepreneur per receiving significant overages, recognition and award he passes WP:GNG. Ginbopewz (talk) 12:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, many reliable sources host sponsored content. But on Wikipedia, that WP:SPONSORED content is not considered a reliable source, regardless of who's hosting it. There are also many sources here where they haven't even bothered to label obvious paid puff pieces as sponsored. All we have here is a mountain of puff pieces and sponsored content for sources. Storchy (talk) 12:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment that low rumbling noise you hear is the sound of a herd of meatpuppets, galloping up and over the hill to pile in here. Storchy (talk) 13:04, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment : You act like this site is fer-Meta CEO and just the first generation entrepreneurs but then the site is not complete. Family businesses and founders and achievers have a right to be here, why would you reject this good case for no reason? Fer real. I can say there are so many such prominent Indian cases that should be here considering its the 5th largest economy in the world through. You should allow few more who are NOTABLE. I can give you a list later. Do not try to create a paradigm shift but this argument may take one because of me so please be rational admin sirs/mams, and please consider the merit of this case in an unbiased way. Nuttyprofessor2016 (talk)

Wikipedia has very careful definitions of what and who is notable enough for an encyclopaedia article. On Wikipedia, not all notable companies have notable heads, if all they've ever done is be the head of the company. The relevant guideline in this case is WP:BIO. You might also find WP:NOTINHERITED helpful. Storchy (talk) 14:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen cases go either ways on this very site about similar cases. This ain’t Bumble, of course, that anyone create a page, so notability is a criteria. He is also a columnist, FYI Nuttyprofessor2016(talk)

Here are some other AFDs on non-notable heads of notable companies, for comparison:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Aslett, president and CEO of Mercury Systems,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bobby Castro, founder and CEO of BHG Financial. Storchy (talk) 15:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

http://vaibhavmaloo.com/blogs/ . FYI Nuttyprofessor2016 (talk) 15:36, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Columns that he's written himself are primary sources. Can you find significant coverage of his work as a columnist, in reliable secondary sources? Because if he's a notable writer, then that might be worth pursuing. Storchy (talk) 15:56, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

His work has been duplicated but as himself as primary source. I know that. A combination of all this and leading the WORLD’S LARGEST CYCLOTHON (by number), I think he should be fine. Floor is open.

Nuttyprofessor2016 (talk) 16:17, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to the source cited he didn't lead the Tour de India, he "served in Tour de India organising body, ID Sports for a year". Storchy (talk) 16:29, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He still shows as the MD on the official site. Please check. Served is a polite word for someone who has had an occupation.

http://www.tourdeindia.asia/aboutus.html Nuttyprofessor2016 (talk) 16:40, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that what "served" means in this context, but the reference in the article says "served for a year", not "serves". The reference you've just linked to appears to contradict the one in the article, but it does say that he's MD of ID Sports, who run the tour. I think I see why now: the Tour de India doesn't appear to have been held since 2013. You can certainly add that new reference though. Storchy (talk) 16:53, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, it hasn’t since 2013. That year was the larger of the two. ID sports still manages the franchise. Nuttyprofessor2016 (talk) 17:34, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As an executive officer, he could be notable. Being managing director, chairman or member of boarding of truss of multiple notable companies including Enso Group, Tour de India, Enso Care, Enso Healthcare and BSE, was covered by reliable sources that paasing mention of him just to specify his positions. I think [67], [68], [69], [70], [71], [72], [73] and... would be enough to pass WP:GNG. ZanciD (talk) 20:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These references are very poor as either press-releases, PR or interview or passing mentions or routine annoucements. None of them consisitute WP:SECONDARY coverage that is NOT PR driven. scope_creep^Talk 12:21, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- I read all Keep & Delete comments. Keep voters have presented logical reasons for their claim and I do agree with them. For example, an Indian business executive has had several important positions like as chairman or director in several notable companies. Sources in article prove it. Or several in-depth & reliable sources are mentioned by voters that help us know subject meets General notability guideline. I think sources in article are sufficient to show notability of a business executive. Yüsiacı (talk) 01:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per the reviews noted and sources provided by ZanciD. most of the time, we have to choose between company or person who is the founder or main person of that, when one of them (company and chairperson) does not qualify for notability singly. As ZanciD noted, being Key person of multiple notable companies proved by sources, could causes to meet WP:GNG. Elbatli (talk) 20:42, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Effectively three WP:SPA sleeper accounts, likely paid editors coming in to fudge the Afd. No interest in sources. scope_creep^Talk 12:08, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete Through my own analysis of the sources and the reference review above it is clear this person is non-notable. It is a lot of routine annoucements, PR, press-releases, scheduled events, passing mentions and indirect sources, for example the company but no significant independent secondary coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO and that is an honest assessment. scope_creep^Talk 12:12, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) 4meter4 (talk) 02:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Lawlor

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

Cannot find any better sources. 10 pageviews in 30 days for a UK BLP is very low, and indicative of a lack of notability. Fails WP:GNG. Edwardx (talk) 17:51, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 18:01, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep I found a few references better than the ones in the article. There's this from the British Council. It is a blog post, but not an individual blogger. There is a film about fashion featuring him. There is a short description here: "The Irish designers everyone will be watching at London Fashion Week. (2017, September 16). Irish Examiner (All Ireland)." Other than that I came across interviews and a few name checks. Lamona (talk) 18:33, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Blogs are not reliable sources, per WP:BLOGS. And it is not a "film", it is a 1:28m YouTube video. Neither counts towards WP:GNG. Edwardx (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reply See WP:NEWSBLOG - it distinguishes between self-published blogs and those that come under the editorial control of a reliable organization. Also, lots of things are on youtube including, for example, President Biden's speech captured by CSPAN. I don't think we would reject that because it has been added to youtube. The thing to look at is editorial control and reliability, not just the platform. Lamona (talk) 20:30, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG. For example, see Vogue Italia 2010 (featuring Lawlor and his 2010/11 fall/winter collection) and Business Post (Ireland) 2013 (featured alongside 12 other Irish designers). He got a paragraph in the 2017 Irish Examiner preview of London Fashion Week, and his 2011 collaboration with Welsh designer Jayne Pierson fusing "his" knitwear with "her" leather to create a new textile was featured in Wales Online. There is also this 2012 Daily Telegraph article on his exhibition at the Fashion Space Gallery at LCF, which is paywalled. Cielquiparle (talk) 10:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- per the sources like [74] this and above as satisfies WP:GNG. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 10:13, 3 October 2022 (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.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muppala Sridhar Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baby Ameya Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sajith Jagadnandan

[1] Chambers, Colin (2020). Black and Asian Theatre in Britain. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9781134216895.

[2] Lang, John (December 26, 1999). "Amateur pilot answering the call of the Arctic plans to challenge north pole in biplane". The Star-Ledger. p. 36 – via NewsBank.

[3] Ruane, Michael E. (April 5, 2000). "Death and Daring". Washington Post. p. B1.

[4] McCord, Joel (May 2, 2000). "After frigid flight, aviator met with warm reception; Pilot reached North Pole after journey in open plane". Baltimore Sun.

[5] Boin, Sonia (May 6, 2000). "Polar pilot tells of pain, near-death experiences". The Frederick News-Post.

[6] McCord, Joel (April 6, 2000). "Weather slowing North Pole explorer; Snow in Ontario stalls open-cockpit pilot". Baltimore Sun.

[7] Andes, Jennifer (April 27, 2000). "Pilot makes Pole trip - in open cockpit - Aircraft, ashes of friend left behind in Arctic". The Seattle Times. p. A7 – via NewsBank.

[8] Bonner, Paul (June 4, 2000). "Adventurer to bare polar tale on TV". The Herald-Sun. p. B1 – via NewsBank.

[9] Dunkel, Tom (January 8, 2004). "Adventure Mode". Baltimore Sun. p. 1D.

[10] Talcott, Christina (January 6, 2005). "After a Record-Setting Voyage, Trying to Inspire More to Soar". Washington Post.

[11] Dillard, Demetrius (July 13, 2022). "Martin Museum presents veteran astronaut Tom Jones in latest speaker program". The Avenue News.

[1]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 <!-- Only if additions to this section do not clearly fit with one of the aforementioned categories, then please feel free to list or transclude. -->
 <!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srutimala Duara}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel Helmes}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geua Tom}}