Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 December 22: Difference between revisions
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
__TOC__ |
__TOC__ |
||
<!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list --> |
<!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list --> |
||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bezel Engine}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Stretton}} |
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Stretton}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E.V.A. (band)}} |
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E.V.A. (band)}} |
Revision as of 01:19, 22 December 2023
- 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 01:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Bezel Engine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This video game engine does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSOFT. Most of the sources I could find were primary sources from Nintendo, blogs, or press releases. A quick search through Japanese sources provided nothing of use. Sparkltalk 01:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Software. Sparkltalk 01:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Does not appear notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. I see a consensus to Keep this article but improvements, as suggested in this discussion, still need to be made. Liz Read! Talk! 05:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- Pamela Stretton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ARTIST. Most sources are from http://www.rosekorberart.com/ which appears to be a primary source. LibStar (talk) 00:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Visual arts, and South Africa. LibStar (talk) 00:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep: I recovered the dead links to the citations and added more details. Although it looked like all the sources were from a gallery website, they were actually reviews of her work from other publications; the content of the reviews was reposted on the gallery website. Thus, there are ample examples of significant coverage. Included is a review in The Sunday Independent, the magazines Contempo and Art South Africa, and a review in Monday Paper. I also added missing citations and looked into the awards listed in the Infobox. She was a finalist for the Absa L'Atelier Art Competition three times and was selected for the Spier Contemporary Competition and Exhibition which appears to be a big deal in the South African art scene. Rublamb (talk) 03:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per the work put in by Rublamb. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:48, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep as per comments by Rublamb to meet WP:NARTIST. WP:DINC, even if most sources at the time the article was nominated were primary. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete The article relies mainly on primary sources for biographical and exhibition/collection information. I am not finding reliable sourcing for the information presented. The entire content about Stretton at the VISI citation is
The series by Pamela Stretton, who was born in South Africa and now lives in the U.K., focuses on the female body, and is to a large extent autobiographical.
This press release was cited multiple times. Fails WP:ARTIST. Not part of any significant exhibitions or collections, and does not have significant RS coverage. WP:TOOSOON --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)- Comment: Looks like you missed part of the VISI article. The full content to consider is: "Featuring three extraordinary artists – Lyndi Sales, Pamela Stretton and Eris Silke – the exhibition showcases a collection of artworks from colourful abstract creations to images built up from pixilated digital ink-jet prints and sensitive paintings of dreams and fantasy. ...The series by Pamela Stretton, who was born in South Africa and now lives in the U.K., focuses on the female body, and is to a large extent autobiographical. Issues such as beauty ideals and the body’s relationship with popular culture, fashion, health and food come to the fore in her works, which take the form of pixilated digital inkjet prints. Each 20 x 20mm pixel contains iconography drawn from the food, fashion, consumerism and health and fitness industries, such that the viewer is forced to stand at a distance in order to make the image visually resolve." This could be used to replace primary sources in the article. Also, it is allowable to use primary sources—they just don't apply toward notability. The key here is that there are potential secondary sources that can be used to expand the article. The review in The Sunday Independent proves notablity and is not yet used. Rublamb (talk) 01:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- To reinforce the point about primary sources, note WP:PRIMARY#3 and WP:PRIMARYNOTBAD. -Kj cheetham (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- Comment It looks like Rublamb missed the point that the VISI article is a press release put out by the gallery. No byline, and the bottom states
Catch this showcase of the power of women in art at Cape Town’s Barnard Gallery until 13 April. For more info on the exhibition or artists, visit www.barnardgallery.com.
. I understand primary sources can be used for some facts, but I do not think they can be used to establish notability. Nor can native advertising. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:59, 27 December 2023 (UTC)- Indeed,
secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability
. I hadn't noticed that was a press release (normally I'd expect to see press releases published in multiple locations), so I'm changing my !vote to a weaker keep. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC) - Comment: As someone who used to write press releases and do PR for a living, reporters often end an article that way,, especially when writing about exhibitions and shows. I never assume something is a press release unless I see the same content in several places. But let's assume @WomenArtistUpdates is correct and remove VISI from the list of articles toward notability. These sources remain: The Sunday Independent, the magazines Contempo and Art South Africa, and a review in Monday Paper. Rublamb (talk) 18:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
- Looking at the remaining "sources", there is the Monday Paper - the newspaper for University of Cape Town , and Art South Africa, which I can find no reference of existence. Are you familiar with that publication or has her gallery presented a typo in the title? Again, not much help in establishing notability.
Contempo Magazine is a pretty weak source as well.Whoops wrong magazine. No Idea about the South African publication. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)- This is what Art South Africa look like. A typical art journal that is significant/notable enough to be sold through the used book market. I have also added a link to a PDF of the Spier catalog.Rublamb (talk) 13:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Looking at the remaining "sources", there is the Monday Paper - the newspaper for University of Cape Town , and Art South Africa, which I can find no reference of existence. Are you familiar with that publication or has her gallery presented a typo in the title? Again, not much help in establishing notability.
- Indeed,
- Comment It looks like Rublamb missed the point that the VISI article is a press release put out by the gallery. No byline, and the bottom states
- To reinforce the point about primary sources, note WP:PRIMARY#3 and WP:PRIMARYNOTBAD. -Kj cheetham (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: Looks like you missed part of the VISI article. The full content to consider is: "Featuring three extraordinary artists – Lyndi Sales, Pamela Stretton and Eris Silke – the exhibition showcases a collection of artworks from colourful abstract creations to images built up from pixilated digital ink-jet prints and sensitive paintings of dreams and fantasy. ...The series by Pamela Stretton, who was born in South Africa and now lives in the U.K., focuses on the female body, and is to a large extent autobiographical. Issues such as beauty ideals and the body’s relationship with popular culture, fashion, health and food come to the fore in her works, which take the form of pixilated digital inkjet prints. Each 20 x 20mm pixel contains iconography drawn from the food, fashion, consumerism and health and fitness industries, such that the viewer is forced to stand at a distance in order to make the image visually resolve." This could be used to replace primary sources in the article. Also, it is allowable to use primary sources—they just don't apply toward notability. The key here is that there are potential secondary sources that can be used to expand the article. The review in The Sunday Independent proves notablity and is not yet used. Rublamb (talk) 01:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep - A search found reliable sources that show notability, including the subject's participation in the 10-year Spier national art project, which Smithsonian Libraries noted was juried. I have added that to the subject's article. This clearly passes WP:GNG and meets WP:NARTIST. AuthorAuthor (talk) 08:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:54, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Trying for one more relist before closing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Per Rublamb and above. dxneo (talk) 15:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: as per AuthorAuthor, in addition the The Sunday Independent's review. Qaqaamba (talk) 20:15, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I still think the article relies on primary sources. Nothing in the citations added have shown this artist's notability. All material from https://web.archive.org/web/20110306175509/http://www.rosekorberart.com/exhibitions/stretton/stretton.htm should be removed. Most of the reviews point to the subject being a recovered anorexic as the hook. Doesn't make her a notable artist. As the college newspaper says
It was time to package the experience
[1]. There is nothing notable about the Spier Contemporary award. It appears to be a showcase for a winery.[2] Hoping another editor familiar with notability requirements for a living "creative" will take a look and agree with me. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:25, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Rose Korber Art". web.archive.org. 8 March 2011. Retrieved 9 January 2024.
- ^ "The Spier Art Collection". Spier Wine Farm. Retrieved 9 January 2024.
- 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. Consensus appears to be that sourcing is insufficient Star Mississippi 03:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- E.V.A. (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unsourced and absolutely not notable. Fails WP:BAND. Sgubaldo (talk) 00:29, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Italy. Sgubaldo (talk) 00:29, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Sources: There appears to be Italian language coverage of this band in these three sources. Left guide (talk) 00:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Weak delete The second two sources are press releases. Here is another source: [1]. It does not say much, though, and I wouldn't consider it significant coverage. If more sources come up, I will reconsider. Broc (talk) 23:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Comment There's also coverage in Il Piccolo (p. 27, bottom left) and La Stampa (centre of the page). I also found it:Girodivite (link) but that doesn't seem reliable. toweli (talk) 18:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:18, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @Toweli: thanks for finding those sources. In my opinion it still does not fulfill WP:SIGCOV as Il Piccolo is a local newspaper and the mention in La Stampa is on the local section of Vercelli and not on the national newspaper. --Broc (talk) 08:47, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was no consensus. clpo13(talk) 19:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Christopher Muneza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Delete as an obviously promotional article. would've been speedied as WP:G11 if it wasn't put up for AfD.
Pfomma (talk) 23:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 December 8. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 00:41, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Rwanda. Shellwood (talk) 00:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: The nominator is the article's creator and they actually added an undisclosed paid editing tag (dif here) about 10 months after creating the article. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:41, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to garner more opinions here. I might have suggested a PROD prior to trying AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:28, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Question: Both at this site's article and on the Internet at large, an exorbitant proportion of the subject's coverage comes from The New Times (Rwanda); how independent and reliable is that source? Left guide (talk) 02:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- IMHO, The New Times could be a reliable source since it discusses the subject indepth and is independent. Toadette (Merry Christmas, and a happy new year) 12:24, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- Comment – Should this article be speedily deleted since the author voted delete while sources from The New Times and KTPress establishes notability for the subject? I would choose "keep" since it fairly passes WP:NBIO but what has been commented above suggest that the page be G7'ed. The nomination is really confusing for me. Toadette (Merry Christmas, and a happy new year) 12:24, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. If you had looked at the page history, which is the least any AFD discussion participant should do, you would have seen that the article was tagged CSD G7 at least twice, both times declined. The reasons are in the edit summaries.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:50, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was no consensus. ✗plicit 01:20, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Lakshmi Shruti Settipalli (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Sources run of the mail facebook account, imdb, all and all poorly sourced. Sources are not secdondary or independent dont meet WPINDP or WP:SIRS Comintell (talk) 07:30, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: All I find are PR items [2], [3] which at least confirms it's written by ANI PR, [4] and [5], none of which are RS. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep: The article needs inline citations and may have originated for promotional purposes, but still meets notability. I dug through the listed sources and converted the bare URLs into citations. It turns out that two of the sources do provide significant coverage that is independent and reliable. "Lakshmi Shruti Setttipalli Was Intrigued by Squash When She First Saw It Played" is published in Prosquash, the leading source for squash in India (where the sport is big). The other solid source is the extensive article, "I Want To Be The Best" in the Deccan Chronicle. Rublamb (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 10:43, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep - Sources highlighted by Rublamb ([6], [7]) appear to demonstrate WP:GNG. ~Kvng (talk) 22:07, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:27, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. As has been pointed out, there is some coverage. That said, it falls short a bit of the WP:GNG. gidonb (talk) 02:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- I don't see what's wrong with the Deccan Chronicle article; that's an extensive full-page feature story. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. clpo13(talk) 19:46, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oxometrical society (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non notable University Society. Lacks depth of coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Australia. AllyD (talk) 08:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- An entire article on a joke university society that doesn't let Wikipedia readers in on the joke. Sidney John Baker did in 1953, but alas didn't have much to say other than explaining the joke, and that's about the extent to which this has been reliably documented. The sources at hand don't really say much, either. The Melbourne Argus is mostly going on about the Ern Malley hoax, for example. Uncle G (talk) 23:01, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- This point has now been address in the latest edits - further content and sources added. Hope this now helps satisfy? :) Skullbound (talk) 01:04, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
- More links to further independent sources have now been added.
- Is it enough to have the nomination for deletion now removed? Skullbound (talk) 01:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
- All you've done is bombarded it with more passing mentions, So no, not enough. And it also raises questions about your own use of oxo shite. Sources you've provided simply do not directly support the text you have written. Are you looking for a degree yourself? duffbeerforme (talk) 13:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. I suggest that this now be kept. Bduke (talk) 06:34, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 10:43, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: Agreed with duffbeerforme, article is just peppered with trivial mentions. If someone could find just two or three good in-depth references, they could bulldoze this whole thing and rewrite an informative article. But a dozen or more passing mentions do not add up to information. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 16:01, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:27, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relisting. Right now there is no consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: Agreed with duffbeerforme. Where it is mentioned in reliable sources it is only mentioned in passing. No in depth coverage. TarnishedPathtalk 10:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was redirect to West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor#Stations. ✗plicit 01:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- Arts/Industrial District station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Proposed station, expected to enter service in 2043. Per WP:CRYSTAL, this absolutely should not exist. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and California. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Redirect to West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor#Stations. We're a decade or more out from the design of the station advancing beyond a dot on a map. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Redirect to West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor#Stations: Far WP:TOOSOON. The station won't be existing anytime soon, and who knows if it will still be in the plans 10 or 15 years from now as it's proposed that the station will be there. Nothing's been confirmed yet, thus it's a WP:CRYSTAL violation. It can be redirected to the list of stations on the planned rail line for now. Streetlampguy301 (talk) 00:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Redirect so that this can be changed over if it becomes notable later. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 05:40, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn Liz Read! Talk! 23:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- Kuchinotsu No. 37 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I made this article in January of 2021 when I knew less about editing Wikipedia. The only reliable sources I can find about this cultivar are mentions in articles about other cultivars. It was tagged for notability in September this year. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. I think you can just speedy delete it under WP:G7. Deltaspace42 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Biology, and Japan. Deltaspace42 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Deltaspace42: I am unsure if it is notable or not. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 01:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Redirect to 'Encore' mandarin: if you're not sure about notability, let's just redirect the page to the more notable of its parents, where it is already mentioned. This can always be undone by any editor, if notability becomes clearer. Owen× ☎ 13:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I think there's notability here. I did a Google Scholar search and turned up quite a few mentions. [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] among others. Unfortunately, I don't have access to these articles. My Japanese isn't quite good enough for academic uses, but searching for "津之望 つののぞみ" brings up numerous articles. DCsansei (talk) 14:44, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)- DCsansei, Are you sure that 'Tsunonozomi' is the same as Kuchinotsu No.37? I may withdraw this AfD nomination. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 05:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I believe sufficient sources have been found to prove this cultivar's notability. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 22:52, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.