Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 December 28: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 04:07, 28 December 2023

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< December 27	December 29 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

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. But it looks like this article still needs some clean-up editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:20, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kumarasamy Visalini

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

Does not appear to meet notabilty criteria per WP:BLP1E - see concern on talk page. The single event of supposedly having an IQ of 225 is dubious as best and only 1 event, unlike other prodigies, such as Hirata and Ung-yong who have more events. aeschylus (talk) 04:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Engineering, Computing, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Also known as the youngest to receive various certifications and is the author of several scholarly articles (now added to article). Coverage is over several years, not just for the announcement of her IQ.

Rublamb (talk) 16:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, passes WP:GNG. There is significant coverage of the subjects IQ test in The Asian Age, and their other acheivements and meeting the PM in The Hindu. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 17:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:41, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Looking for a few more opinions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep story in the Hindu as well [1], as well as what's in the article, confirming she has a high iq, but the article now reads more like a resume. Oaktree b (talk) 01:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge‎ to Names of God. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Divine name

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

Seems like a WP:DICDEF to me, although I am honestly unsure. I imagine most sources are WP:OFFLINE. We also have [2] and [3] and some rather in-depth discussion about divine names already at names of God. I am not sure if a redirect there is appropriate, would appreciate other editors to weigh in. Darcyisverycute (talk) 03:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Darcyisverycute (talk) 03:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this used to redirect to Tetragrammaton. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 04:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- That's really not appropriate. There's a lot of scholarship on divine names, and restricting it to monotheism is missing out an awful lot of the subject. Uncle G (talk) 05:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If names of God encompassed polytheisms, this would be an obvious redirect. But it doesn't; and the second source currently cited as well as many other things that turn up indicates that we need something that connects El (deity) to dingir to Yahweh to Elohim, because there are plenty of books that connect these together under the umbrella of divine names. Then there are umpteen sources that connect the Mesopotamian lexical lists of divine names ("god lists") to the subject. Uncle G (talk) 05:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Names of God -- That article does have polytheistic religions, but in a very confused manner. It an effort to maintain the God v god false dichotomy, they've tied that article into a knot. Merging this rather sad piece into that target (along with Uncle G's excellent suggestion on lexical lists) would create a much better article overall and improve the encyclopaedia. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 13:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- In fairness, it's not really mine. ☺
  The first genre that probably comes to mind in Assyryology when someone mentions a large list of divine names is the lexical god-list genre, a genre that developed over the course of more than two thousand years in ancient Mesopotamia.
  — Allen, Spencer Loren (2015). "The Divine Hierarchy and Embedded God Lists (EGLs)". The Splintered Divine: A Study of Istar, Baal, and Yahweh Divine Names and Divine Multiplicity in the Ancient Near East. Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Records. Vol. 5. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 9781614512363., p.95
  
  Already in the Early Dynastic period, scribes attempted to bring some order to the confusing number of known deities by compiling lists of divine names.
  — Leick, Gwendolyn (2009). "Gods and Goddesses". Historical Dictionary of Mesopotamia. Historical Dictionaries of Ancient Civilizations and Historical Eras (2nd ed.). Scarecrow Press. ISBN 9780810863248., p.77
  
  […] the noted French Assyriologist Jean Nougayrol once remarked that nothing illustrates the immobility of Babylonian religion better than the long lists of divine names copied unchanged for nearly two millennia. […] The fixed character of the WGL over centuries should not be taken as a sign of stagnation. Rather, […]
  — Tugendhaft, Aaron (2016). "Gods on clay: Ancient Near Eastern scholarly practices and the history of religions". In Grafton, Anthony; Most, Glenn W. (eds.). Canonical Texts and Scholarly Practices. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781107105980., p.170
  There is an awful lot to say (from just the rest of that chapter of Allen 2015 alone, let alone the other umpteen) merely about the one facet of the subject of how people spent millennia making lists of divine names. Nothing changes in human nature. I suspect that if the scribes were alive today, they'd be making lists in Wikipedia. Except that for the ancient ones we have scholarship about how confusing to the subsequent readers they are. ☺
  Uncle G (talk) 07:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merge to this target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:40, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Names of God per Last1in. I would not be opposed to a major rewrite as well. Tryin to make a change :-/ 09:09, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:39, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ballydonoghue GAA

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

Insignificant presence for this sporting club and appears to fail GNG. Andre🚐 23:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Football, and Ireland. Andre🚐 23:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. In my own WP:BEFORE, I found and added a number of sources which support the text and contribute to a claim to notability under GNG. At the very least there is sufficient notability/refs to support a merge/redirect (as an WP:ATD) to Lisselton#Sport. Outright deletion doesn't appear the correct action and isn't one I can support. Guliolopez (talk) 15:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - county championship winning team, and current senior champions for North Kerry. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I've expanded introduction and added a History section with sources. Club very relevant due to recent successes. Fox&Pheasant 21:23, 28 December 2023 (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. clpo13_(talk) 19:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Baysted

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

Subjects fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Just another run-of-the-mill video game employee lacking in notability and failing to assert notability. As for reliable sources, he only has one outside this article, but that does not assert notability as well. Article has been created by the subject, a clear-cut COI case. Despite being PROD deleted in 2009, this article has since been recreated in 2011; despite this, issues still remains unaddressed since 2020.

This subject's bio is unsourced, nothing is except credits for his work consisting of those from official websites and IMDB, which is neither a reliable source. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Video games, and United Kingdom. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:MUSICBIO applies. In this short biography it states that Baysted has been nominated for a number of awards - at least some of which are notable including the Golden Reels. There is potential for meeting WP:MUSICBIO#8. ResonantDis_tortion 12:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, it's best to 'clean' out that article and start again by a 3rd party editor from scratch rather than it be left as some WP:COI vanity edit. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Articles for Deletion is not cleanup. Article is now stubbed. ResonantDis_tortion 16:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep multiple nominations for notable awards (WP:MUSICBIO#8); segment on national radio (WP:MUSICBIO#12); multiple secondary coverage in specialist zines (WP:MUSICBIO#1); music created for multiple notable works (WP:MUSICBIO#10). Article has been updated to demonstrate all this, and has been cleared up of non-RS. ResonantDis_tortion 11:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The current sourcing is not good. The Sound Architect and M Magazine are mostly interviews (primary sources). The "Contributors" source is of course primary, as is the University of Chichester page. I am therefore instating the {{primarysources}} tag. Behind the Audio leans towards acceptable whereas BBC Radio 3 seems to confirm WP:MUSICBIO#12. Geschichte (talk) 11:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (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 Soundscape R.Ed. This was a toss-up between No consensus and a Merge. Ordinarily, I'd relist a discussion with this level of participation but it's already been relisted three times so that is not an option. If you believe some content should be Merged to additional articles, I say feel free to take that on. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soundscape Digital Technology

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

Unsourced article for 15 years, an excessively detailed history of a sound/recording technology company. I can find a couple of 1990s articles online in a specialist magazine, but this wouldn't be sufficient to pass WP:NCORP these days. Time for this article to go? Sionk (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, Technology, Computing, Software, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:20, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NEXISTS. Ordinarily I prefer to add links to ill-sourced articles that are up for deletion before voting, but there's a disconnect here between the sourcing and the article itself. This article is about two things, the SSHDR1 and the company.
The history stuff is unsourced (maybe scraped from somewhere, copyvio style, no obvious candidates) and probably would need to rely on primary sources. It seems a shame to lose all this information if it can be sourced. Mackie has published a number of press releases and company announcements (it's a listed company) which could help for verifiability.
For notability, I think the extensive coverage of products over more than a decade would suffice. Here are a series of sources, there are more:
- Sound on Sound profile of Soundscape R.Ed [4]
- 1993 Music Technology Article on HDR system [5]
- Audio Media magazine review of R.Ed (a reprint provided by the company but appears to be an independent review)[6]
- Sound on Sound 1995 article with a few sentences on Soundscape systems [7]
- Sound on Sound April 2006 review (post-Mackie) [8]
- Making music with digital audio : direct to disk recording on the PC, book has multiple instances discussing Soundscape products [9]
I would note that these were easily found, suggesting the nomination would have benefited from a better WP:BEFORE exercise. Sound on Sound is a specialty magazine, but its not a minor publication, and there are others.

There are also two potential merge targets Soundscape_R.Ed and Soundscape SSHDR1 both of which are poorly sourced but several of these sources extensively discuss those products and would help save them from deletion. I'd be happy to see the three merged. Oblivy (talk) 02:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:43, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect to Soundscape_R.Ed as ATD. Since there are already pages for the products, a merge is the best solution all round. In order to meet GNG/NCORP guidelines for an article about the company, we require at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. As per GNG/WP:NCORP which are the appropriate guidelines for both companies and for products, there is very little information available on the company but extensive reviews on the products. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was 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!} 03:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FTP Commander

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

There is no source in the article, and no source that meets the notability requirements can be found. The article does not meet Wikipedia notability . 日期20220626 (talk) 22:32, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:35, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:15, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Advertising blurbs from the software company still exist all of these years later, but there's pretty much zero independent documentation that isn't just a directory listing with a company URL in a list of "Here's where you can get FTP clients." I thought that I had found a book with a non-directory treatment, but upon reaading it turned out to be 2 sentences: It's like other FTP clients; and it's for Windows. So I'm not finding in-depth coverage in multiple independent sources, either.
Deleted edits here and at InternetSoft Corporation lead me to think that there was probably a conflict of interest in this article's creation, too, disguised by picking a new username in 2007 and trying again.
Uncle G (talk) 05:10, 14 December 2023 (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, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:GNG. A search revealed the sources discussed by the nominator, enough for a merge if there was a suitable target, but as it stands there does not seem to be an WP:ATD. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 16:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. If editors want to still pursue a possible Redirect of this article, you can start a discussion on the article talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:25, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Hezbollah

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

Factually inaccurate article. Cited sources have no information besides including the word Syrian Hezbollah inside them. There is no group called Syrian Hezbollah. Ecrusized (talk) 21:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note It also appears that the article was created by a now blocked editor. Ecrusized (talk) 21:27, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 December 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Syria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to Hezbollah involvement in the Syrian civil war, which is the proper article for this topic. There is no distinct Hezbollah organization operating in Syria as is the case for the Kurdish Hezbollah in Turkey, for instance. yaguzi (talk) 01:06, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There is, in fact, a "Syrian Hezbollah" that is not the same as the Lebanese Hezbollah; however, it is a network of militias, not a single group. For anyone interested in the topic, I suggest read the work of Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi who has researched many militias which operate as part of the "Syrian Hezbollah" network. Applodion (talk) 21:38, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It belongs to Hezbollah, just as their militants in Lebanon, see ISW entry [10] and the linked book, as well as our page Hezbollah involvement in the Syrian civil war. Yes, it includes a number of different groups, but they operate under the same general command and umbrella. However, nothing prevents us from creating a separate page about Hezbollah in Syria. If so, it should be significantly expanded. My very best wishes (talk) 19:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that the "Hezbollah involvement in the Syrian civil war" article is focused on the activity of Lebanese Hezbollah in Syria, not the operations of the Syrian associates / puppets of Hezbollah. Thus, "Syrian Hezbollah" should focus purely on the Syrian associates, allowing for two distinct articles. Applodion (talk) 00:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per Applodion Durranistan (talk) 13:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for same reasons AHI-3000 (talk) 02:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:44, 28 December 2023 (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 per improvements to page. (non-admin closure) Schminnte^{[talk to me]} 04:11, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Alexander Hess

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

Disputed draftification, which is why it is now at AfD. I am not persuaded he passes WP:NACTOR nor WP:NAUTHOR 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:17, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Theatre, Sexuality and gender, Missouri, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:11, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - sources 1 and 2 might be enough to meet generic notability. Bearian (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I've added reviews of Hess's works (including a recently published work) from Kirkus Reviews and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. I feel he's notable per WP:NAUTHOR, more specifically because of the critical attention his work has received. Bridget (talk) 06:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the improvements made. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 01:59, 31 December 2023 (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. clpo13_(talk) 19:51, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

War of ideas

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

This article is an essay that builds heavily on WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. The article is about a vague general term that overlaps with Propaganda, Political warfare, Information operations and Soft power. There was a deletion discussion in 2010 that resulted in a "Keep" verdict based primarily on arguments that there are sources out there that use the term "War of ideas". However, it seems pretty clear that while sources use the term, there is no coherent, consistent use of the term. It's also clear that the general ideas associated with the term are already covered in more clearly scoped articles for coherent concepts (such as Propaganda, Political warfare, Information operations and Soft power). Since the 2010 discussion, the fact that the article still looks like an WP:OR essay should make it clear that there is no consistent core concept or idea on which to build a proper encyclopedic article. There are therefore good reasons to reconsider the status of the article and in my view delete it. The mere existence of a general phrase does not mean it merits a Wikipedia article. The phrase "war of ideas" is similar to phrases such as "battle of wits" and "war of the wills", yet we would not accept creating an article for the latter two phrases, even if there are countless sources that use those phrases. Thenightaway (talk) 14:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Please fix the header~~ Thanks 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 18:16, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Philosophy, Military, and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:16, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Information warfare -- this is duplicative of the concept cited in that article, which is far too heavy on a strictly military usage of the concept. A merge would improve that article and reduce the complexity of the encyclopaedia. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 16:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:49, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a legitimate subject, as one can conclude by looking at the results of Google books search. There are even books entirely on this subject, for example [11]. In addition, this page maybe useful to creating page Political ideologies that we currently do not have (currently a redirect to Ideology#Political_ideologies). My very best wishes (talk) 19:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there are plenty of good sources in the article, plus many more online. AfD is not for article improvement. Bearian (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: very different article from Information warfare, the merge target. Information warfare article talks about use of propaganda during war while war of ideas article talks about (ideological) war with propaganda. War of ideas does not have any problem with WP:OR otherwise. If you read it, all non-trivial sentences are sourced. बिनोद थारू (talk) 03:50, 28 December 2023 (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 Discount points. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Service release premium

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

Whole article tagged with 3 issues over 10 years ago Chidgk1 (talk) 17:41, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:41, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to discount points. Also recommend merging yield spread premium to the discount points article. My reasoning is according to the following quote: A central feature of the U.S. mortgage market is that, in addition to providing the borrower with the principal on the loan, the intermediary also pays a “rebate” to the borrower to cover closing costs and other expenses. This upfront payment, which goes by many different names (yield spread premium or YSP, service release premium, (negative) discount points), plays a central role in all mortgage transactions but is often not explicitly disclosed to the borrower who just sees the rebate in the form of changed closing costs. (from [12]) Darcyisverycute (talk) 08:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:44, 28 December 2023 (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!} 04:23, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with discount points: While this is definitely a term used in the industry, it doesn't stand up as article-worthy. This would be better discussed in the merge destination. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:15, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge‎ to Moorish Science Temple of America. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Pittsburgh standoff and shooting

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

fails WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 03:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Joeykai (talk) 03:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Merge & Redirect to Moorish Science Temple of America as an AtD as proposed below. My reasoning against a standalone article that follows remains valid, but a merge/redir to Moorish Science Temple with selective merge into Eviction in the United States makes sense. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 12:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC) Original !vote: Delete as WP:NOTNEWS. Fails WP:NEVENT on literally all criteria. If, at some point in the future, anyone can find secondary sources (all current cites are WP:PRIMARYNEWS) that use it as a case study or pinpoint lasting WP:EFFECT, the article can be recreated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Last1in (talk • contribs) 13:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the Moorish sovereign citizens section of Moorish Science Temple of America, under legal incidents. While this isn't notable enough for its own article it does seem to have caused legal problems (getting so many cops suspended) and is an interesting example. There actually is coverage of it in the context of "a wider trend" so I think it's not undue

Actually did get significant coverage just last week, four months after this occured, which I think shows some lasting importance even if it would be better served in the context of that article instead of its own (https://www.dailyitem.com/wire/politics/public-safety-and-criminal-justice----and-the-perceptions-of-both--/article_e642abc9-ce0f-5092-bd16-0d6b7679fd6c.html). At the very least it is an interesting example of sovereign citizen violence PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge also to Eviction in the United States, at least. Such a violent reaction to serving an eviction notice needs to be documented somewhere and the content ought not be lost. While WP:NOTNEWS applies to this event, I am not so sure that the event should be dismissed as just not notable. The police are certainly going to pay attention to this and adjust their tactics accordingly. I suspect the lasting effects are still to play out, too. I wonder if this was pitched as a different sort of article, such as a notable police killing of a person, whether it would then be considered notable. Given a whole suburban neighborhood appears to have been endangered, with surrounding homes shot up, too, the reaction of the evictee appears extraordinary and was unexpected. I also cannot help but draw parallels with the Napier siege in New Zealand, where a major part of the city was locked down by an active shooter, after police executed a search warrant. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 11:15, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as two different Merge target articles are being proposed. It also would have been preferable if a more thorough deletion rationale had been provided by the nominator.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:22, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Again, two different Merge targets are being suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz I think Cameron was suggesting we merge it to what I suggested and also add a part to the eviction in the US article. Or maybe not. @Cameron Dewe Thoughts? PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz and @PARAKANYAA: To both target. My rationale for suggesting Eviction in the United States is that a brief account of this incident would serve to illustrate what can happen when law enforcement officials get it wrong and have an extreme reaction to the eviction process that the evictee refused to participate in. My rationale for Moorish Science Temple of America, under legal incidents, is that the various sovereign citizen movements have beliefs that seem to be at odds with the laws of the land that fail to appreciate and understand common law and their rights and responsibilities. It is like they are fighting for their rights but rejecting their responsibility to abide by the law when it goes against them. There are two different reasons, so two targets exist. Sorry if life is more complicated than Wikipedia wants it to be. Having multiple redirect target suggest the event might actually be notable, too. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 04:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cameron Dewe The content could go on more than one page, but technically a redirect can only point one place. Which would you prefer? PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PARAKANYAA: If that is the case, I would agree with your suggestion of the Moorish Science Temple of America, under legal incidents, because it is more specific. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 03:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, okay. I'm gonna try to clean this up a bit before the merge happens at least... PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. I don't think that the discussion would change significantly with a final relist so I'm closing this now as No consensus. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:20, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Herwig Zahorka

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

Fails GNG and NBIO. Single source in article is a memorial written by a family member, fails WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. BEFORE showed nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth // Timothy :: talk 03:46, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, History, Czech Republic, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:21, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

* Delete Does not meet WP:GNG and has no WP:SIGCOV Philipnelson99 (talk) 12:06, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- 5 books, 250 articles and a decoration by Germany suggest notability. I agree COI is an issue, but should not be decisive. This makes me wonder how comprehensive nom's investigation was. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:01, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm willing to change my position but I didn't think quantity of work determined if a subject is notable. Philipnelson99 (talk) 18:37, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Article is poorly-written, but can be cleaned up if anyone is available to do so. CuteDolphin712 (talk) 19:20, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. A lot of editing has happened in this article since its nomination and a review of the article and its sourcing would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Changing my position based on the changes that have been made to the article. I'd like to see more references in the article before changing to keep. Philipnelson99 (talk) 19:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:22, 28 December 2023 (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!} 00:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Zeitlin

AfDs for this article:

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

Per attempted PROD which was contested for largely procedural reasons: Individual is of dubious notability and the article is currently lacking any inline references. All sources listed appear to be primary sources, and I can't find secondary ones. Since then a source has been added which as far as I can see does not mention the person. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This may be a hoax. Extremely vague offline referencing, and the one link that is provided ([13]) does not seem to mention him at all. No obituaries found for this person on newspapers.com in 1998 despite being a "prominent" soldier, which is odd. No mentions of him at all on GBooks, despite allegedly being a prominent hydraulic press designer. Curbon7 (talk) 05:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unverifiable, likely hoax. Curbon7 (talk) 06:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a hoax stricto sensu as the listed patents are legit and were filed by a certain Alexander Zeitlin (you can run them through Google patents and get a pdf of the patent). Certainly non-notable, though. Ostalgia (talk) 08:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there was a PROD, so Soft Deletion not possible. However, looking at the previous AFD, it appears to be about a different person who shared this name, different biographical details.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even if true and written by a descendant, it is still impossible to verify. --Khinkali (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted a note at WikiProject Military history. — Maile (talk) 23:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Heavy Press Program. Classic WP:COATRACK; article contains almost nothing about its purported subject. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:59, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Worth noting that the original version doesn't have any of the "military leader" terminology - that seems to have crept in in an independent copyedit a few years later. I don't think this feels like an hoax; the citations seem plausible (eg the Lehigh collection is the papers of Loewy, one of the companies involved). Feels like an obituary written in the style of a professional journal that was posted here instead? Andrew Gray (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get a few more opinions on what should happen with this article. We need more support for Delete for a Deletion to occur and I'd like to see if there are others who believe a Merge is appropriate.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I was unable to find some of the sources, checked Google and Google Books and things weren't lining up. Dr vulpes (Talk) 04:25, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not exactly a hoax, but seemingly a conflation of two different people? Perhaps as an attempt to increase claimed notability, since neither individual person seems to be notable by themselves. I can't say I've seen a purposeful combination attempt like this, just cases where two same-named people were accidentally mixed up. Silver seren^C 19:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to List of CNN Philippines original programming. We cannot Redirect this article to List of programs broadcast by CNN Philippines as this page is a Redirect itself. Please check to see whether target pages are articles or redirects before proposing them. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Real Talk (Philippine talk show)

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 01:09, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. DonaldD23 talk to me 01:09, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Probably a merge with CNN Philippines (or any related article) instead of a delete? I remember seeing this show, but it was short-lived. So a mention in any CNN-PH article would do.--- Tito Pao (talk) 08:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get more opinions and to see if there is additional support for a Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:24, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More inclined towards the merge option (I prefer that it be redirected to List of programs broadcast by CNN Philippines) and maybe integrate relevant content in the "List of programs" article. -Ian Lopez @ 16:44, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Now there are two different Merge targets, hoping to hear from a few more people to settle this difference of opinion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. We need a few more opinions to settle the different point of view on Merge target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:10, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with CNN Philippines per suggestion by Tito Pao UtherSRG (talk) 17:12, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per the below (which is a redirect), I amend my !vote destination to be for List of CNN Philippines original programming. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:08, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of programs broadcast by CNN Philippines: Barely found anything about the show that lasted only 2 years aside from the sources in the article. A redirect to the mentioned list is the way to go when it comes to non-notable programs. ASTIG 😎🙃 09:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. Again, this article can't be Merged to a nonexistent article. Maybe bring up that possibility should that article ever be created. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:09, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wide-angle Infinity Display Equipment

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

I do not think that his article should remain, seeing as there is no good way to find reliable sources for any of this. I have no records that the company made this product and therefore no way to verify anything. Another thing is that this topic does not warrant it's own article, and should instead lead to the page on general aircraft simulators.

Delete Effectively unsourced (the one cited reference is not really about the subject), and no information about this topic found. It therefore fails WP:GNG. Poorly-written, too; I can barely tell what the article is about. If someone who knows the subject can insert some references and clean up the text, I may reconsider. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 00:46, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Surprisingly, I found this obituary about the person invented it [14]. We'll still need more for sourcing, but there might be something here. Oaktree b (talk) 00:56, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Obituary above, then [15] and [16] that talk about this "thing". I don't understand much of it, seems to be about the display used in flight simulator machines to train pilots. Oaktree b (talk) 00:58, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- While there is an obituary about the person who invented it, the only other resources are links back to this Wikipedia page. Gbrickner (talk) 02:55, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - No, the peer reviewed journals talk about it. Oaktree b (talk) 22:24, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Despite the paucity of sources available, I'm inclined to keep it. This was a significant innovation by Rediffusion in the field of flight simulation, which, after the patent expired, became the industry standard for projection systems on full flight simulators. Before WIDE, there were a variety of visual systems in use on FFS, all technologically inferior, none of which survives today. --Deeday-UK (talk) 10:09, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting again. If no further comments, I will close this as No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at sources like ISBN 9780521357517 and ISBN 9780470754368 it is clear that this should be at the title that is currently a redlink in the first sentence of the article, because this is discussing a subject under one of the many trade names (even from Rediffusion, which had two WIDEs and some predecessors such as Duoview, according to some of the books that I've just found; and Rediffusion isn't even the only company here). I am confident from even a brief amount of research that this could be refactored into an article that doesn't address cross-cockpit collimated display systems under a marketing trademark title, and that there is sourcing from quite a lot of technical literature for doing that and making a proper main-article for Full flight simulator#Collimated cross-cockpit displays that discusses things like the slightly imperfect simulation that collimation results in, weight and mirror design advances using mylar film, and all of the other things that are in the books. Although it will probably be another 16 years until someone takes the hint from this discussion. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 04:42, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree on all fronts: this article should be merged into Cross-cockpit collimated display, once such article is created. My earlier Keep vote would only apply until that happens (yes, quite possibly in 16 years time or so...) --Deeday-UK (talk) 09:33, 28 December 2023 (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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 10:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Hansen

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

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. BuySomeApples (talk) 02:17, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well if one of the best metal producers in the world who is a Grammy award nominated and has produced for the biggest metal band in the world and you said that doesn’t seem to meet WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG please tell me who meets those, I believe this is just being vandalised by User:BuySomeApples, I request the closure of this conversation and remove the deletion tag as this is nonsense. Punk Rock London (talk) 02:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Punk Rock London: if you click on the links to those guidelines, they explain them in a bit more depth. Basically, the page would need more sources to verify his notability, either by discussing him/his career in depth and/or by verifying that he meets one of the special notability criteria for musical artists. For example, even a couple of articles from reliable, independent sources would help get this over the threshold. BuySomeApples (talk) 02:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay he is the only producer of a band called Amaranthe who has thousands of reliable independent sources as he has produced every single song of the band. Punk Rock London (talk) 02:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, information could be added to the Amaranthe page. Otherwise, his notability as an individual would have to be established. The guideline pages do a better job of explaining than I could, and would probably save you time in the long run. BuySomeApples (talk) 03:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He’s in the Amaranthe page, You can see every album and any music realised has his name as producer Amaranthe (album) please check it out, Many thanks. Punk Rock London (talk) 11:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Punk Rock London: That's great! He should definitely be included on the Amaranthe page for a start. Right now, this AfD is to determine whether he should also have a standalone page. Some musicians are notable only for their work with certain groups, and some are notable enough to need a page just about them as individuals. BuySomeApples (talk) 17:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Denmark. Skynxnex (talk) 04:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. For starters, we have [17] as well as shorter, but informative pieces in [18], [19]. Hansen also released a minimum of two albums with each of the bands Invocator, Pyramaze, Anubis Gate and Beyond Twilight - performing both vocals, guitar, bass and drums interchangeably - so his musical abilities will have been assessed in album reviews of those bands. Geschichte (talk) 08:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Invocator. Just about every source on Hansen describes him as "Grammy nominated" but that stretches the truth and is probably the result of dishonest press releases. The connection is actually via his band Invocator, who were nominated for a Danish Grammy in 1991. Therefore Hansen is not directly "Grammy nominated" himself, and I suspect that his publicity announcements are trying to imply a more prestigious American Grammy nomination. Meanwhile, this article strangely omits the fact that he achieved most of his media notice as a member of Invocator for the past 36 years. He obviously works as a producer too, but in that field he gets the notice that a typical producer gets: credits on other people's albums and occasional interviews that talk about those albums (e.g. [20]). His career as a producer is already mentioned at Invocator's article and that is sufficient. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 17:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He definitely meets all the requirements as the bands that he produced for are really important Punk Rock London (talk) 18:36, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are articles in Danish, German and Slovak. (I've just linked them.) They cite a German Rock Hard magazine article about Hansen (Frank Albrecht. "Der Produzent: Jacob Hansen". Rock Hard, August 2008, page 27).
Moreover, he is "a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles" (see WP:MUSICBIO #6).
I am not voting "keep" only because of paid editing concerns. (See User talk:Punk Rock London#December 2023 2. I don't think the user could have been paid for bad artices like the ones he created, but still...)
Btw, the Danish, German and Slovak articles look the same, but they were created by different people. It looks like the German article was created first (in 2009), and several years later it was translated to Danish and expanded, and then the Danish article was translated to Slovak. --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Metal Production of the Year: VOLBEAT/Jacob Hansen (producer) – "Guitar Gangsters & Cadillac Blood" (Danish Metal Awards 2008) --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've decided to vote. Notable enough for me. And he has three Danish Metal Awards [da]. (See that Danish Wikipedia article.) And he "has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles". --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:02, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Draftify‎. Star Mississippi 03:59, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Monashee Spirits

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

I'm not sure this has enough WP:SIGCOV to make the cut. It looks like a mix of local coverage, passing mentions and non-RSes like WP:FORBESCON. BuySomeApples (talk) 01:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, sources such as "VancouverIsAwesome" don't make the cut for significant sources. Recommend for deletion. UptonSincere (talk) 01:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This is about the best I could find [21], [22]. Coverage is too local to count, and it's mostly just "come visit the cool local distillery". Oaktree b (talk) 01:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. The page is new, so it makes sense. Suitskvarts (talk) 11:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with a tag for more references: I feel deleting the page is a harsh move, because the subject has many references in the local publications and covered deeply in most of them. Even it has non trival moderate coverage by Washington Post. Plus won the Canadian Artisan awards and fulfills the WP:GNG that deleting it would be harsher move. I do not know much than you professional Wikipedians but I rather suggest you to see the references again in detail. I suggest an admin to tag it with the notices for more references to be added for confirming its notability or to draftify it. Zagol Ethiopia (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:59, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 06:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. The page is new, as indicated above. Bduke (talk) 02:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify seems like WP:TOOSOON, local coverage. TLA (talk) 06:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with the above to Draftify this article to allow more time to come up with good sources. Jacona (talk) 18:58, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to Niger at the 1992 Summer Olympics. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:01, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hassane Illiassou

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

Unable to find SIGCOV from my searches and it does not seem that national records are covered under NATH. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 00:37, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Africa. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 00:37, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Niger at the 1992 Summer Olympics. Judging from the results, he competed at the Olympics, World Championships and World Indoor Championships on a quota, since every country in the world are allowed at least one participant. He would not have qualified without it and as such did not achieve good enough results to be recognized in sources. Geschichte (talk) 08:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the subject is a Nigerien national record holder at the World Indoor Athletics Championships and he ran at the 1992 Olympics. Due to his presence in athletics at such a recent Olympics, the subject is deserving of a presumption of sources existing -- the reason why they aren't at this specific moment easily findable is because of a combination of the subject's name not scanning well (at newspapers.com he is more often listed as "Hassane Llliassou" for example) and also the difficulty of accessing contemporaneous news sources from his home country of Niger. A comprehensive effort to address these issues should be made before a deletion decision is made. --Habst (talk) 03:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. The global community reached a solid consensus that no presumption of notability exists for any athletes, and that a presumption of coverage only exists from meeting specific NSPORT criteria if a piece of SIGCOV has already been identified. As we do not have the required citation here, there is no reasonable P&G-based reason to keep this article in mainspace.

JoelleJay (talk) 02:04, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelleJay, thank you for replying. I completely agree with WP:SPORTBASIC -- I think that we should address these issues to find that piece of SIGCOV so that we can then work to keep the article. The guideline based reason to keep this article for now is WP:DEADLINE (linked from WP:NSPORT policy), which allots us time to find the required sources and is especially applicable in this case due to the reasons above (many variations of name, pre-Internet time period, country with primary non-English language). Based on Liste des Fédérations Sportives Nationales at the Wayback Machine (archived 2018-09-03), it appears we have a possible contact for Nigerien athletics, but another approach would be to look for Nigerien newspaper archives (Newspapers.com only mostly covers English-speaking papers). The word "should" is crucial here -- there is no WP:OBLIGATION to improve Wikipedia, but I think it would be best to look to improve contested articles before deletion, especially in cases where NATH is met. --Habst (talk) 02:57, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, NSPORT does not allot time to find the SPORTCRIT #5 SIGCOV source; it is supposed to be in the article from the start. NATH is not met if that criterion is not satisfied. JoelleJay (talk) 03:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelleJay, thank you for replying and clarifying the policy. If a SIGCOV is required to be in the article from the start even for NATH articles, then why not delete all of the following articles? These are just the track and field Olympians since 1952, and while many of them meet NATH none have non-database sources (there might be a few with non-web sources but you can see the vast majority of them do not, this would not be too hard to filter out).

Extended content

Levan Sanadze Toivo Hyytiäinen Boris Tokarev (athlete) Fritz Schwab Erkki Kataja Ahmed Labidi Reino Hiltunen Leonid Bartenyev Sergio D'Asnasch Roy Sandstrom Edmund Turton (athlete) Jennifer Thompson (athlete) Sandra Valenti Pier Giorgio Cazzola Lyudmila Samotyosova Nicole Goullieux Anni Biechl Đorđe Majtan Michèle Demys Charles Asati Julius Sang Roger Lespagnard Martin Jellinghaus Dave Travis Joachim Kirst Angelo Sguazzero Reinhard Theimer Inge Bauer Clovis Morales Sue Golder Sherry Calvert Brenda Matthews Thomas Wessinghage Rita Kühne Horst-Rüdiger Schlöske Modupe Oshikoya Christina Heinich Tadeusz Ślusarski Frank Siebeck Max Klauß Olga Mineyeva Éva Ráduly-Zörgő Siegfried Schenke Rolf Bernhard Aleksandr Kornelyuk Bärbel Struppert Yevgeniy Gavrilenko Mario Pérez Saldívar Hans-Jürgen Bombach Leonid Lytvynenko Nikolay Kolesnikov (sprinter) Margherita Gargano Vera Anisimova Mariya Petkova Karl Fleschen María Elena Sarría Marcel Philippe (athlete) Piotr Bielczyk Dušan Janićijević (athlete) Vladimir Muravyov (athlete) Nikolay Sidorov Pavol Blažek Willi Sawall Mohamed Kedir Aliaksandr Trashchyla Othmane Belfaa Hildegard Körner Rufina Ubah Béla Bakosi Juha Tiainen Sunday Uti Conceição Geremias Antonio Corgos Roland Wieser Zofia Bielczyk Vasyl Arkhypenko Nunu Abashydze Aleksandras Antipovas Jutta Kirst Zakariah Barie Aleksandr Makarov (javelin thrower) Mariusz Klimczyk Brian Diemer Francesco Panetta Eddy Annys Mary O'Connor (runner) Aurora Cunha Lorna Griffin José Luíz Barbosa Lucio Serrani Julius Kariuki Vince O'Sullivan Agostino Ghesini Simon Baker (racewalker) Paola Moro Li Meisu Kazuhiro Mizoguchi Julius Korir Antonio Selvaggio Marie-France Loval Sigurður Einarsson (athlete) Junichi Usui Arto Härkönen Tony Sharpe Don Wright (athlete) Sejad Krdžalić Agapius Masong Michèle Chardonnet Pat Scammell Babacar Niang Emi Matsui Walter Ciofani Martial Fesselier Charles-Louis Seck Henry Amike Liu Yuhuang Hector Begeo Peter Rwamuhanda Ralf Salzmann William Motti Ahmed Musa Jouda Christina Sussiek Arjun Pandit (athlete) Silke Möller Sandie Richards Kirsten Emmelmann Mikhail Shchennikov Douglas Wakiihuri Silke-Beate Knoll Vladimir Krylov Tibor Gécsek Ronald Weigel Galina Malchugina Christine Wachtel Petra Felke Adewale Olukoju Christian Plaziat Yevgeniy Misyulya Grigoriy Yegorov Vyacheslav Ivanenko Kimmo Kinnunen Stefan Johansson (racewalker) Kathrin Weßel Jacqueline Hautenauve Thierry Toutain Sylvia Dethier Axel Noack Zhong Huandi Huang Zhihong Anelia Nuneva István Bagyula Ian Morris (athlete) Yasmina Azzizi-Kettab Leonid Voloshin Emmanuel Tuffour Dezső Szabó (athlete) Cayetano Cornet György Bakos Ulrike Sarvari Maite Zúñiga Alain Blondel Anne Piquereau Ľudmila Melicherová Javier García (pole vaulter) Ekaterini Koffa Vladimir Ovchinnikov (athlete) Olena Zhupiyeva-Vyazova Philippe Collet Zhao Youfeng Mauricio González (runner) Laurence Bily Karin Janke Chen Yanping Chen Zunrong Han Kulker Airat Bakare Andrea Thomas (German athlete) Mogens Guldberg Diana Yankey Philippe d'Encausse Attila Kovács (athlete) Akemi Matsuno Maia Azarashvili Patrick Delice Viktor Yevsyukov Mark Forsythe John Mwathiwa Gong Guohua Svetlana Buraga Nelson Boateng Thomas Kearns (athlete) Toma Tomov Kumi Araki Satu Pauri Oliver Acii Mirosław Chmara Kim Chul-kyun Markus Hacksteiner Frank Möller (athlete) Rex Wilson Liliana Allen Uta Rohländer Héctor Herrera (runner) Kōichi Morishita Nicoleta Grasu Silvia Costa (athlete) Phylis Smith Joel Lamela Patrick O'Connor (sprinter) Aliuska López Lyudmila Rogachova Valentina Yegorova Urszula Włodarczyk Margareta Keszeg Susana Feitor Maritza Martén Juliet Campbell (athlete) Vladimir Andreyev (racewalker) Jaime Jefferson Addis Abebe Viviane Dorsile Valeriy Spitsyn Dahlia Duhaney Rico Lieder Britta Bilač Vebjørn Rodal Robert Změlík Beatrice Utondu Nancy McLeón Benyounés Lahlou Oumar Loum Zhang Lianbiao Serge Hélan Linda Kisabaka Masayoshi Kan Masaki Morinaga Marieta Ilcu Sanna Kyllönen Igor Trandenkov Ebru Kavaklıoğlu Valentin Kononen Natalya Shikolenko Marina Azyabina Bárbara Hechavarría Tina Paulino Catherine Scott (athlete) Min Chunfeng Rita Ináncsi Neil de Silva Bettina Sabatini Stella Jongmans Nathalie Teppe Birgit Clarius Martha Tenorio Labros Papakostas Miguel Ángel Rodríguez (racewalker) Lucrécia Jardim Xu Demei Yiannis Zisimides Valentīna Gotovska Oleh Tverdokhlib Irina Mushayilova Ramilya Burangulova Michael Green (sprinter) Odalys Adams Dan Philibert Teresa Machado Nelė Žilinskienė María Luisa Servín Ángel Hernández (long jumper) Alvin Daniel Ricardo Vera Erick Keter Jonah Birir Toshihiko Iwasaki Liu Li (athlete) Zoltán Káldy Elmer Williams Mette Bergmann Ralf Sonn Katarzyna Radtke Nuno Fernandes Francisco Javier Benet Gustavo Adolfo Becker Eusebia Riquelme Abdelali Kasbane Daniel Cojocaru Milan Gombala William Koech Zoila Stewart David Kibet Pascale Grand Sonya Agbéssi Ouattara Lagazane Marino Drake Francis Ogola Piotr Piekarski (runner) Sébastien Thibault Patricia Foufoué Ziga Sieglinde Cadusch Beverly McDonald Tomáš Dvořák Svetlana Goncharenko Toshinari Takaoka Szymon Ziółkowski Olga Kotlyarova Bernardo Segura Konstadinos Gatsioudis Édson Ribeiro Sergey Makarov (javelin thrower) Omar Mena Kutre Dulecha Deji Aliu Hadi Soua'an Al-Somaily Ruslan Mashchenko Sergey Korepanov (racewalker) Gao Hongmiao Jón Arnar Magnússon Assefa Mezgebu Ludmila Formanová Delphine Combe Zhao Yongsheng Natallia Sazanovich Gregor Cankar Tatyana Chebykina Niki Xanthou Charity Opara Salah Hissou Sui Xinmei Raymond Hecht Ayelech Worku Lyudmila Galkina Anna Kozak Yelena Afanasyeva (athlete) Johanna Manninen Anna Biryukova Olga Kardopoltseva Lev Lobodin Tünde Vaszi Joseph Keter Salem Al-Ahmadi Mary Tombiri Ibou Faye Sergey Lyakhov Inna Lasovskaya Vyacheslav Shabunin Sylvie Mballa Éloundou Zuleima Araméndiz Debbie Parris-Thymes Sébastien Levicq Vita Styopina David Kimutai María del Carmen Díaz Mirtha Brock Khalid Boulami Denis Langlois Sonata Milušauskaitė Irina Khudoroshkina Vitaliy Sidorov (discus thrower) Peter Blank Zsolt Kürtösi Olga Rublyova Abdellah Béhar Modris Liepiņš Carlos Calado Serhiy Osovych Christian Nsiah Zuzana Hlavoňová Yelena Gulyayeva Mika Halvari Johan Botha (runner) Arnaud Malherbe Oleg Veretelnikov Charles Gitonga Andrei Tivontchik Holger Blume Aliaksandar Hlavatski Ren Ruiping Petya Pendareva Neil Winter Laurens Looije Osmar dos Santos Shakti Singh (athlete) Cleverson da Silva Dieudonné Kwizera Nikolay Matyukhin Yuliya Lyakhova Mikhail Vdovin Andrey Loginov Prodromos Katsantonis Savieri Ngidhi Patricia Rodríguez (athlete) Viktoriya Vershynina Olena Shekhovtsova Viktor Ginko Luís Feiteira Jim Svenøy David Maxwell Strang José Ramos (runner) Mikhail Khmelnitskiy Yu Guohui Alice Matějková Martin Lachkovics Andrey Ignatov Grace Birungi Daria Nauer Štefan Malík Melissa Straker Vasiliy Bubka Shigekazu Ōmori Tiia Hautala Mario Bonello Nada Kawar Imma Clopés Zsolt Czingler Evripides Demosthenous Frederick Onyancha Zlatka Georgieva Mireille Gigandet-Donders Sergey Alay Emmanuel Bangué Birgit Hamann Shadrack Hoff Dzimitry Hancharuk Philipp Huber Julio Luciano Jarosław Kotewicz Vasif Asadov Wagner Marseille Réda Benzine Dashdendev Makhashiri Lyudmila Filimonova Ana Amelia Menéndez Andrey Moruyev Gu Yan Volodymyr Kravchenko Olena Khlusovych Ellsworth Manuel Yang Siju Maksim Smetanin Aleksandr Jucov Viktor Sotnikov (athlete) Philip Dunn (racewalker) Daniel Caines Enefiok Udo-Obong Olesya Zykina Irina Khabarova Melissa Mueller Amy Mbacké Thiam Concepción Montaner Monica Iagăr Justin Anlezark Yuliya Sotnikova Alessandro Gandellini Roman Rasskazov Oleksy Lukashevych Tatyana Shikolenko Vyacheslav Voronin Yelena Yelesina Matthew Quinn (sprinter) Liu Hongyu Sergey Klyugin Vala Flosadóttir Elena Antoci Kirill Sosunov Claudia Dreher Denis Kapustin (athlete) Dai Tamesue Mame Tacko Diouf Patrick Dwyer (sprinter) Peter Burge (long jumper) Joseph Batangdon Igor Spasovkhodskiy Danil Burkenya Erica Johansson Pavel Gerasimov Tatyana Efimenko Sofiane Labidi Mardrea Hyman Aleksandr Porkhomovskiy Sarah Jamieson Alwyn Myburgh Gao Shuying Mohamed Ouaadi Robert Kronberg Yamna Oubouhou Yuan Yufang Salem Al-Yami Tatyana Gudkova Aïda Diop Tesfaye Tola Anzhela Balakhonova Mubarak Ata Mubarak Marina Kislova Zoltán Czukor Lyubov Perepelova Kadiatou Camara Karin Ertl Eliseo Martín Claudia Gesell Boris Gorban Gábor Máté (athlete) Hazel-Ann Regis Natalya Tsyganova Natalya Gorelova Ionuț Pungă Zuzanna Radecka Elvir Krehmić Wang Liping (racewalker) Julia Sakara Kim Soon-hyung Timo Aaltonen Piotr Balcerzak Aminata Diouf Nikolett Szabó James McIlroy (runner) Ato Stephens Feng Yun (hurdler) Irina Krakoviak-Tolstika Bahia Boussad Prodromos Korkizoglou Caroline Fournier Tanya Stefanova Satoshi Yanagisawa Yelena Belyakova Nikolay Atanasov Karen Shinkins Claudine Komgang Ryszard Pilarczyk Piotr Długosielski Jonathan Chimier Jean-Patrick Nduwimana Aki Heikkinen Paul McKee (athlete) Mauricio Díaz Martina de la Puente Elena Bobrovskaya Nobuyuki Sato Pedro Martins (racewalker) Chen Tien-wen Abebech Negussie Peter Korčok Militza Castro Kamal Boulahfane Miloslav Konopka Zamira Amirova Rafał Wójcik Mohamed Saïd El Wardi Oleksandr Yurkov Sabine Fischer Glody Dube Shanta Ghosh Zsuzsanna Szabó-Olgyai Samir Moussaoui Ricardo Roach Moussa Aouanouk Anna Jakubczak Doris Auer Athina Papayianni Monica Twum Vladimír Maška Robert Daly (sprinter) Ousmane Niang Marcel Lopuchovský Saïd Berioui Roman Magdziarczyk Katarzyna Żakowicz Wilbert Pennings Voldemārs Lūsis Alex Malinga Camilla Johansson (triple jumper) Zhivko Videnov Dariusz Trafas Serhiy Dymchenko Montxu Miranda Marie Poissonnier Ari Ichihashi Uģis Brūvelis Marvin Watts Shin Il-yong Roman Rozna Zach Whitmarsh Konstantinos Pochanis Libor Malina Viktor Kovács Yu Xin (athlete) Ivaylo Rusenov Tetyana Kryvobok Vítor Costa (hammer thrower) Wilfrid Boulineau Zeng Xiujun Jo Van Daele Ricardo Williams (athlete) Megumi Oshima Sergey Bochkov Mehdi Jelodarzadeh Erkinjon Isakov Vladimir Potemin Darko Juričić Alpha B. Kamara Harijan Ratnayake Sergey Izmaylov Beatriz Santiago Marián Bokor Tanko Braimah Mike Trautmann Dimitrios Serelis Sheena Tosta Casey Malone Kristin Heaston Moushaumi Robinson Ralf Bartels Sylviane Félix Natalia Semenova Anna Mahon Laura Gerraughty Erin Gilreath Olimpiada Ivanova Dmitriy Karpov Natalya Ivanova (hurdler) Claudia Hoffmann Claudia Marx Mario Pestano Joeri Jansen Tatyana Levina Fatou Bintou Fall Jaroslav Bába Eddy De Lépine Yu Chaohong Dragana Tomašević Elizna Naudé Lien Huyghebaert Ilona Usovich Iryna Lishchynska Paolo Casarsa Samwel Mwera Julio Rey Daichi Sawano Roman Valiyev Romary Rifka David Fiegen Petrina Price Delphine Atangana Mohammed Amyn Shi Dongpeng Geraldine Pillay André Höhne Miho Sato Li Yanxi Barbara Madejczyk Alena Newmyarzhytskaya Bastian Swillims Grzegorz Sudoł Song Hongjuan Li Meiju Wioletta Frankiewicz Volodymyr Zyuskov Su Yiping Pavel Sofin Małgorzata Pskit Aliaksandr Parkhomenka Li Rongxiang Aïda Sellam David Söderberg Štěpán Tesařík Serhiy Demydyuk Hicham Bellani Giovanni Lanaro Larisa Kruglova Brandon Simpson Iryna Mykhalchenko Vitaliy Shkurlatov David Alerte Majed Saeed Sultan Yvonne Harrison Monika Bejnar Miroslav Vodovnik Khoudir Aggoune Momchil Karailiev Nahida Touhami Tatyana Roslanova Gert-Jan Liefers Patrick van Balkom Hannes Hopley Tamicka Clarke Aurelia Trywiańska Tarek Boukensa Sathi Geetha Hortense Béwouda Moonika Aava Dana Cervantes Abdelhak Zakaria Ruwen Faller Estie Wittstock Eugène Martineau (athlete) Andriy Sokolovskyy Kim Yoo-suk Johan Cronje Geronimo Goeloe Zuzana Malíková Anastasiya Shvedova Han Yucheng Candice Scott Randy Lewis (triple jumper) Chen Haijian Todd Matthews-Jouda Liu Yinghui Ibrahim Mohamedin Manuel Fuenmayor Vera Begić Viktor Yastrebov Darren Gilford Mariya Koroteyeva Wolfram Müller Abbas Samimi Daniela Cârlan Nili Abramski Margaret Maury Ruben Ramolefi Vadim Strogalev Maria Martins (athlete) Lee Eun-jung Aaron Egbele Volha Krautsova Lee Mi-young (shot putter) Grzegorz Sposób Jurij Rovan Carolina Torres Benjamin Kuciński Radosław Popławski Ibrahima Maïga Eddy Riva Abel Chimukoko Christian Nicolay Alberto Chaíça Katleen De Caluwé Svatoslav Ton Miguel Quesada Édgar Hernández (racewalker) Mounir Yemmouni Ahmed Jumah Jaber Viktor Gushchinskiy David Boulanger Mariam Kevkhishvili Jo Bun-hui Jorge Costa (racewalker) Vitaliy Moskalenko Monder Rizki Li Fengfeng Jane Wanjiku Vincent Le Dauphin Anna Guzowska Roman Fricke Mariyana Dimitrova Yusmay Bicet Akosua Serwaa Zhu Hongjun Souhalia Alamou Mario Iván Flores Nelya Neporadna Matti Närhi Paula Tarvainen Élisabeth Grousselle Jiang Jing Sultan Tucker Nicolas Aissat Ramil Aritkulov Nabil Madi Galina Pedan Jānis Karlivāns Joan van den Akker Liliana Zagacka Mestawat Tadesse Michal Šneberger Jakub Czaja Nadine Hentschke Lauri Leis Tepa Reinikainen Gaspar Araújo Boštjan Šimunič Evans Marie Pavel Potapovich Sanja Gavrilović Zhao Yingying Claudia Tonn Tewodros Shiferaw Zhou Can Marcel Matanin Juliane Sprenger-Afflerbach Ilze Gribule Stefan Drews Tomohiro Ito Luís Sá Winneth Dube Zhang Hao (triple jumper) Chang Jung-yeon Gaolesiela Salang Yuriy Voronkin Péter Tölgyesi Ruslan Yeremenko Liang Shuyan Lloyd Zvasiya Liliya Dusmetova Ibrahim Tondi Torsten Schmidt (athlete) Miguel Pate Daniel Dąbrowski Kim Deok-hyeon Roman Smirnov (sprinter) Abdalaati Iguider Frédéric Xhonneux Youcef Abdi Iryna Novozhylova Kathrin Klaas Chang Ming-huang Tsuyoshi Ogata Georgi Ivanov (shot putter) Mickaël Hanany Gu Junjie Leonid Andreev (athlete) Jan Kudlička Yevgeny Lukyanenko Martyn Bernard Yuliya Tarasova Zinaida Sendriūtė Alberto Paulo John Robert Oosthuizen Hadi Sepehrzad Aleksey Drozdov Nicole Büchler Jung Soon-ok Lukáš Melich Jarkko Kinnunen Lajos Kürthy Tom Parsons (high jumper) Mohamed Moustaoui Xie Limei Antar Zerguelaïne Isabel Le Roux Sinta Ozoliņa-Kovala Tadas Šuškevičius Gashaw Asfaw Mohamed Ameur Mikalai Shubianok María José Poves Aleksandr Derevyagin Teemu Wirkkala Anis Selmouni Juan Carlos de la Ossa Roba Gari Maksim Lynsha Vitalij Kozlov Korene Hinds Svetlana Saykina Bogdan Pishchalnikov Thamer Kamal Ali Lin Chia-ying Kseniya Dziatsuk Anton Lyuboslavskiy Henry Dagmil Marcel van der Westen Peter Horák Volha Sudarava Roman Novotný Chen Qi (javelin thrower) Aleksey Sysoyev Joy Eze Przemysław Czerwiński Vyacheslav Muravyev Mekdes Bekele Vonette Dixon Karina Vnukova Robert Häggblom Tetyana Filonyuk Tero Järvenpää Oleksiy Kazanin Antti Kempas Marcin Starzak Tesfayohannes Mesfin Pieter de Villiers (athlete) Tsvetelina Kirilova Ali Abdalla Nina Kolarič Ingus Janevics Liliya Kulyk António Pereira (racewalker) Jan Marcell Donatas Škarnulis Dobrinka Shalamanova Inna Poluškina Tomasz Szymkowiak Fanuel Kenosi Mohamad Siraj Tamim Nathalie De Vos Meritzer Williams Danny D'Souza Mihkel Kukk Uladzimir Kazlou Zhao Chengliang Aleksandra Antonova (hurdler) Louis Tristán Oxana Juravel Olga Ivanova (athlete) Urszula Piwnicka Monica Stoian Aleksey Pogorelov Natalya Murinovich Julien Fivaz Domingas Togna Oleksandra Stadnyuk Demma Daba Anastasiya Ott Andriy Makarchev Ri Kum-song Olha Ivankova Eric Matthias Svitlana Mamyeyeva Kim Il-nam Chang Chunfeng Bianca Knight Serhiy Smelyk Vladimir Krasnov Anita Márton Ben Youssef Meïté Julian Reus Fabienne Kohlmann Pavel Trenikhin Laura Ikauniece Giovanni Codrington Borja Vivas Linda Stahl Sara Petersen (hurdler) Marek Niit Lyudmila Kolchanova Kevin López (runner) Madara Palameika Christian Reif Brigita Virbalytė-Dimšienė Adnan Taess Martin Wierig Cao Shuo Sonata Tamošaitytė Issam Nima Lucas Jakubczyk Serghei Marghiev Thomas Schneider (sprinter) Jessica Samuelsson (heptathlete) Takayuki Kishimoto Andreas Bube Alexandros Papamichail Alexander John (athlete) Risto Mätas Bianca Stuart Isabel Macías Eric Krüger Jonas Plass Indrė Jakubaitytė Nicolas Figère Povilas Mykolaitis Jānis Leitis Lenka Masná Josephine Terlecki Ebba Jungmark Janeil Bellille Remalda Kergytė-Dauskurdienė Nils Duerinck Lehann Fourie Spyridon Lebesis Natalya Kushch-Mazuryk Rafał Sikora Igor Bychkov (pole vaulter) Víctor García (runner) Diego Ruiz (runner) Jérôme Bortoluzzi Kadene Vassell Jung Sang-jin Nick McCormick Daryna Prystupa Aleksandra Kotlyarova Irène Pusterla Álvaro Rodríguez (athlete) Fawaz Al-Shammari Josef Robertson Mykola Labovskyi Jamale Aarrass Olena Kholosha Zhao Jianguo Eva Lubbers Julien Watrin Andrius Gudžius Pieter-Jan Hannes Kristin Gierisch Emiliano Lasa Thomas Jordier Nauraj Singh Randhawa Wang Yu (high jumper) Hanna Plotitsyna Oksana Okunyeva Roberto Sawyers Mame-Ibra Anne Ahymara Espinoza Lebogang Shange Kristiina Mäkelä Adrian Griffith (athlete) Gregor Traber Guo Tianqian Paula Todoran Yuan Qiqi Zarck Visser Alena Sobaleva Joana Costa Levi Cadogan Tigist Gashaw Robert Renner (athlete) Sven Knipphals Gao Yang (shot putter) Ren Mengqian Mamadou Chérif Dia Sandra Gomis Abdullah Abkar Mohammed Marcelle Bouele Bondo Mahmoud Samimi Natallia Viatkina Salim Keddar Femke Pluim Su Xinyue Sven Martin Skagestad Krystyna Hryshutyna Harold Correa Rumen Dimitrov (triple jumper) Boitumelo Masilo Niklas Kaul Mykhaylo Kokhan Bob Bertemes Alexander Doom Óscar Husillos Tony van Diepen Samuel García (sprinter) Taio Kanai Ngoni Makusha Yuki Koike (sprinter) Patrik Šorm María Lucelly Murillo Agnė Šerkšnienė Jin Min-sub Gatis Čakšs Michal Desenský Alin Firfirică Taymir Burnet Yaqoub Al-Youha Diana Mezuliáníková Mostafa Amr Hassan Jan Jirka Xu Huiqin Karyna Demidik Huang Guifen Dawit Fikadu Line Kloster Krista Tervo Nadezhda Dubovitskaya Ryan Sánchez Anete Kociņa Lassi Etelätalo Gabriel Tual Eliott Crestan Shunsuke Izumiya Loïc Gasch Taha Hussein Yaseen Song Jiayuan Wu Ruiting

I found these with a simple one line search i.e. this query. If I expanded it to pre-1950 or other sports I am sure we would find many more. Are all of these thousands of articles subject to immediate deletion because they don't include a non-database reference from the start? I suspect that a mass AfD would not come to that conclusion. So then what principle are we operating on here? --Habst (talk) 15:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All of those articles are eligible for deletion, given a standard BEFORE. Prior to the 2022 consensuses, any of those articles where the subject met a sport-specific NSPORT criterion would have benefited from a presumption of notability that made them much harder to nominate and delete, although they still were required to demonstrate GNG sourcing "eventually". The NSPORT2022 consensus removed all presumption of notability and replaced it with a rebuttable presumption that GNG coverage exists for criterion-meeting athletes if a source of GNG SIGCOV has been identified. This was due to the widespread agreement that the NSPORT sport-specific criteria were, on the whole, much too lax and divorced from the standard they were supposed to predict (GNG). The onus has switched from delete !voters needing to demonstrate a herculean search effort to get such athletes removed, to keep !voters needing to produce the sources showing the athlete actually does meet GNG or at least meets SPORTCRIT with a strong presumption of further coverage existing offline. JoelleJay (talk) 23:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelleJay, thank you for responding. If you think all of those articles plus hundreds more are eligible for deletion, then why not make a deletion request on those grounds so we can settle that question with one big discussion, instead of having dozens of little discussions as articles get nominated here or there, some of which end up being kept? (If you need help, I can provide the other hundreds of articles you say are eligible for deletion by expanding my search). --Habst (talk) 19:52, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...Because we don't want to overwhelm AfD with hundreds of nominations at once? And because bundled AfDs are rarely productive? I didn't say all those articles should be AfD'd, only that they are eligible given a standard BEFORE, which is in contrast to the pre-RfC custom of needing a much higher BEFORE threshold to nominate such articles. JoelleJay (talk) 21:05, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelleJay, thank you for replying and also thank you for your contributions to these discussions, I do think they have helped to improve the articles. AfD process allows you to combine all of the articles into a single nomination. If anything, I think it is far more overwhelming to AfD to have new nominations every week where we essentially rehash the same arguments over and over, rather than just doing it all at once and establishing a principle. --Habst (talk) 19:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A bundled AFD composed of hundreds of AFD-nominated articles would meet with a procedural close, I'm guessing. It might seem like the easy way to consider a high volume of articles but it would be impossible for interested editors to evaluate that many articles and their sources over the course of a week which makes the process unfeasible. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, we are allowed to use common sense when appropriate, per WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT, which are guidelines (versus policy). Not certain if that is the right option yet (to use IAR), just noting. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:09, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 06:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Niger at the 1992 Summer Olympics. Subject lacks the proper WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG for a standalone article. The current sources are just from sports databases. Let'srun (talk) 15:24, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Let'srun, thank you for voting. I think that this article is in desperate need of attention and sources, but I also think it is necessary for us to make a holistic effort at finding sources before we vote to delete or redirect. I've looked through some of the papers on this list, but it seems like most have only archived stories from the last few years on their website, and do not have a searchable archive going back to Illiassou's active participation years. Do you know where we can search to have the best chance of finding coverage of the subject? I think we would be doing him a disservice by only looking at a web search knowing that most of his accomplishments happened pre-Internet. --Habst (talk) 23:45, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully think you are overdoing it in this case, Habst. Replying over and over again when there is nothing of substance to be said about the guy, who was not a good athlete by any means - just happened to be less worse than the others at the time. This is not worth the time, so please do not reply to me by reiterating the same stuff again. Geschichte (talk) 08:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Defer to editorial action‎. There is no clear consensus here between the move, a redirect (per Levivich) or gidonB's original proposal. That is to say there are more !votes for move, but nor is there any refutation of their suggestions. Either of these actions can be handled editorial as there's no support for deletion outright and therefore no need for admin action here or another relist Star Mississippi 15:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inbal Rabin-Lieberman

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

Delete per WP:PSEUDO

If the person is notable only in connection with a single event, and little or no other information is available to use in the writing of a balanced biography, that person should be covered in an article regarding the event, with the person's name as a redirect to the event article placing the information in context.

and per WP:BLP1E

1) Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event. 2) The person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article.

बिनोद थारू (talk) 00:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. बिनोद थारू (talk) 00:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Military. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Nir Am#History per WP:BIO1E, WP:ATD, and WP:CHEAP. gidonb (talk) 02:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move to 2023 Hamas attack on Nir-Am since there is no standalone article on the event. The policy reads "person should be covered in an article regarding the event". There are no grounds for deletion. Marokwitz (talk) 14:24, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move to 2023 Hamas attack on Nir-Am - Per Marokwitz. Dovidroth (talk) 07:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move per Markowitz and Dovidroth. Andre🚐 07:44, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Move to 2023 Hamas attack on Nir-Am per above. // Timothy :: talk 07:20, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I have no objection to a 2023 Hamas attack on Nir-Am article. The move suggestions above, however, are really rework suggestions. Rework is usually beyond the scope of AfDs. I suggest closing as I originally suggested, which makes most sense by the current situation. Next someone can create 2023 Hamas attack on Nir-Am by using the existing text from the history and additional sources, plus re-redirect Inbal Rabin-Lieberman to 2023 Hamas attack on Nir-Am. gidonb (talk) 13:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It looks like a consensus to Move this article but I'd like to hear any response to User:Gidonb's comment on this proposal.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - While I agree with the desired end state being "this should redirect to some other article", simply moving this article without further modifications to a new title such as 2023 Hamas attack on Nir-Am does not look workable: Significant editing would also be needed, but I'm not seeing anybody stepping up as a volunteer to do those edits. Neither is asking the closer to create the target reasonable. As a compromise, I'd suggest draftifying this article, thus giving interested editors time to create the target article after which the redirect can be created. Alternatively, I'd be OK with a "stubify and move" if the closer is willing to put in that extra effort. -Ljleppan (talk) 10:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. gibond's alternative seems to offer better contextualization of the event and avoid WP:NOTNEWS. बिनोद थारू (talk) 17:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not opposed to that either. Ljleppan (talk) 18:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Nir Am#History per gidonb w/o prejudice to somebody creating a stand-alone about the event, again per gidonb. That's the shortest and most efficient route to policy/guideline compliance and still allows for future expansion. Levivich (talk) 18:51, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Love by Chance (Indian TV series)

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 01:08, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. DonaldD23 talk to me 01:08, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:57, 28 December 2023 (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!} 03:57, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails policy per nom. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:07, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect‎ to The Purge (TV series). Content can be Merged if the desired Merge target article is every created. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:56, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Leader Tavis

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

Good Leader Tavis is a minor character in the first season of The Purge; while there are technically sources there for the character, I'm not even sure why she has a page to begin with, given this; merging to create a List of The Purge characters page would make more sense. ICOTEYE (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Television, and United States of America. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge It seems to have a lot of decent content, but it does not seem notable on its own, I think the merge option makes a lot more sense. Geardona (talk) 03:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Purge (TV series). WP:BEFORE didn't show significant coverage. Editors can decide what is the appropriate weight to give the different characters at the target article. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:11, 28 December 2023 (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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:23, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaiir

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

Fails NFILM. No reviews found from RS. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 17:02, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CptViraj (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ~~or at the very least redirect to Satish Rajwade#Filmography, already there with a~~ another one can be added, which, with what is on the page, is a good start.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:01, 13 December 2023 (UTC) Changing to keep (I had missed the 12/17 edit mentioning 2 nominations). (edited 1/2)[reply]
Keep. The review in the article from Marathi Movie World[23] looks reliable to me as does the one in Gulf News[24] I found with a quick google. That's two without even evaluating the TOI coverage or searching in the Marathi language. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Eluchil404 @Mushy Yank

Source Analysis

The Times of India - Press release so not independent per WP:NFSOURCES

Marathi Movie World - See this Disclaimer of the website "Marathimovieworld.com does not make any warranty that this site or its content, products or services will meet your requirements, or that the site will be uninterrupted, timely, secure, or error free. We do(es) not make any warranty concerning the accuracy of the information contained on the site, any products available for purchase on the site, or the (visual) any visual or audiovisual materials offered on or presented through this site.". This clearly means it is unreliable.

Gulf News - Reliable but not enough alone to pass NFILM. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 17:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure your assessment of what appears to be a generic boiler plate disclaimer of warranty means the site is an unreliable source. These kind of disclaimers can be found on many sites. UptonSincere (talk) 02:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure either that this disclaimer gives any reason to dismiss the source at all.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further review of the sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:17, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Is there any more support for the Redirect suggestion? Just want editors to consider ATD if this article isn't Kept.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

'Redirect to Satish Rajwade#Filmography: Fails GNG and NFILM. Agree with LordV's source asseessment. Source eval:

Comments	Source
Article about a social media post by actor containing a movie poster used to promote the film. Fails WP:IS, Fails WP:SIGCOV nothing addressing the subject directly and indepth	1. "9 years of 'Gaiir': Sandeep Kulkarni shares a throwback poster as he reminisces his time on the Marathi film sets". The Times of India. 2018-11-06. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 2023-07-10.
Contributor review	2. ^ "'Gaiir' is a well presented movie". 2009-11-06. Retrieved 2023-07-10.
Mention of film a pair of actors previously were in. Fails WP:SIGCOV, nothing addressing the subject directly and indepth	3. ^ "Ankush Choudhari and Satish Rajwade together once again through 'Autograph'". 2016-06-11. Retrieved 2023-07-10.
Nothing about the film meeting WP:SIGCOV	4. ^ "Maharashtracha Favourite Kon? 2010 TV Serial - Watch Maharashtracha Favourite Kon? 2010 Online All Episodes (1-1) on ZEE5". ZEE5. Retrieved 2023-12-17.
Name mention in promo piece, Fails WP:SIGCOV, nothing addressing the subject directly and indepth	5. ^ Editorial, M. M. W. (2010-11-01). "'Zee Talkies-Lux' Maharashtracha favourite Kon". Retrieved 2023-12-17.

Above and BEFORE found nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 07:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TimothyBlue:, I don't see an analysis of the Gulf News source[25] I adduced above which seemed to me the best, most reliable coverage of the film. Am I missing it, or did you skip it for some reason? I agree that most of the other sources are poor and don't object to a redirect if the Marathi Movie World is considered user generated. I really wish someone could do a search in the Marathi language, since I'd expect some coverage given the English language footprint, but I can't object to a redirect unless some sources are actually found rather than assumed. Eluchil404 (talk) 03:38, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any reason to consider Marathi Movie World user-generated. Film articles with 2 reliable reviews are in general kept, especially when other type of coverage exists so that the page can be expanded. The mention of 2 nominations at Maharashtracha Favourite Kon? (that I confessed I had missed....) makes it in my view better kept than redirected.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was no consensus‎. clpo13_(talk) 19:43, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gansz Trophy

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV independent of the schools. Per WP:NOPAGE, this can be covered briefly at the articles for the respective schools. Let'srun (talk) 16:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, American football, United States of America, Maryland, and Texas. Let'srun (talk) 16:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. At first glance, the coverage doesn't look too deep, but there's a lot of it. Haven't had a chance to review it all and make a decision, but here are some examples found in my WP:BEFORE search: [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32]. Cbl62 (talk) 22:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 19:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. We really a few editors reviewing these sources. Thanks.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: this is a tough one. I reviewed the sources presented above and in general, each piece of coverage is about 80% run-of-the-mill sports reporting with 1-2 short paragraphs at the end actually discussing the trophy/rivalry as an overview-level topic. As for the references currently in the article, the Dallas Morning News piece similarly offers one short paragraph discussing the matchup, this one is merely a stats database, and the last two are primary sources published by the involved schools' websites. Left guide (talk) 23:41, 29 December 2023 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Matson

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

The majority of the article is sourced from obituaries, and they (and related things covering her death) contribute the vast majority of the press coverage about her---though I understand obituaries are considered reliable for the most part (see Wikipedia:Obituaries as sources), I think it is odd to say that they can contribute notability, given that a large amount of semi-well known but not wikinotable people can get obituaries about themselves published. Also, her only notability comes from her suicide, which in itself I do not believe to be a notable event.

AriTheHorse^{talk to me!}

00:08 (updated 13:23), 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, Television, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - to the nom, did you do a BEFORE? There seems to be a lot of coverage of her death in the American press. Netherzone (talk) 02:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did. There is a lot of coverage of her death, but I do not think that this necessarily qualifies her for a biography as per WP:1E. Suicide on its own, I do not believe is a "significant event", and had she not commited suicide, none of those sources about her would have been written.
AriTheHorse^{talk to me!}
05:11 (Updated 05:20), 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Keep. Press coverage nevertheless indicates basic notability.--Ipigott (talk) 12:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:22, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't think she passes BIO, the journalism awards appear minor. Rest of what we have is a basic resume, worked as a journalist, was hit by a train and passed away. Oaktree b (talk) 14:31, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Some policy-based arguments would be helpful in coming to a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:40, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was 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!} 03:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Veronika Raquel

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

Pornographic actress that doesn't pass WP:NENTERTAINER. I've conducted a quick Google search and haven't found any reliable sources. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Sexuality and gender, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:NBASIC and WP:NENTERTAINER. I did not find significant coverage or any reliable secondary sources on the subject. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 16:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Daniel (talk) 23:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Men's World Floorball Championships

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

Event is happening in 2026 as of now it's WP:TOOSOON Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Sports. Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 02:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If it's too soon, then why is there articles for other world championships in 2026. You can't just pick and choose. They either all get deleted or they all exist. Also, DON'T DELETE IT! If you get your own way, make it a draft. Don't make my time making the article a waste. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 11:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2026 FIFA World Cup, 2026 FIBA Women's Basketball World Cup, 2026 Women's FIH Hockey World Cup and 2026 Men's FIH Hockey World Cup are some of the numerous tournaments that will be in 2026 that have articles (there are many more notables World and European championships in 2026 also). As I have already mentioned, you can't just pick and choose. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 11:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, you are comparing events of completely different notability levels. Svartner (talk) 17:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Men's World Floorball Championship as an alternatives to deletion - This appears to be rather WP:TOOSOON, but I've no prejudice towards recreation once actual information begins to appear in reliable sources. The existence of other stuff is not a persuasive argument. -Ljleppan (talk) 10:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:20, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep That's enough information for an article. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 11:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since Finnish is presumably not easily approachable for most contributors, here's a brief summary of the sourcing as of 15 January 2024: IFF and Suomen Salibandyliitto (Finnish Floorball Association) are rather obviously not independent. Both STT references are press releases written by Suomen Salibandyliitto, and thus also not independent. The Etelä-Suomen Sanomat story is attributed to STT (thus almost certainly based on a non-independent press release) and consists of next-to-no useful content: Two sentences about how multiple floorball events will be organized in the coming years, two non-independent quotes, and then three sentences of background about older events. Not useful for notability purposes. The tampere.fi reference is a press release from the city where several of the events will take place, I don't view this as useful for notability purposes. The final reference, from Ilta-Sanomat, appears to also be a simple regurgitation of the Salibandyliitto press release, starting with Two floorball world caps will be played in Finland on consecutive years, Salibandyliitto announces.. It's a short story discussing multiple events, and there's no independent analysis or content beyond just the trivial basic facts they presumably lifted from the press release.

In total, we have a bunch of press releases from non-independent parties, and then two barebones news stories that simply regurgitate said press releases without any independent content. Ljleppan (talk) 09:07, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:TOOSOON and the event is way less notable than event like 2026 FIFA World Cup, 2026 FIBA Women's Basketball World Cup and 2026 Winter Olympics for example. 11:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB14:11E1:400:CD1A:F55A:AEB1:5C5 (talk)

Delete WP:TOOSOON. Way too far ahead. Grahaml35 (talk) 21:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:19, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Women's World Floorball Championships

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

Event is happening in 2025 as of now it's WP:TOOSOON Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Sports. Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 02:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Czech Republic. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UEFA Women's Euro 2025, 2025 World Men's Handball Championship, 2025 World Women's Handball Championship, EuroBasket 2025, 2025 ICC Champions Trophy, 2025 World Aquatics Championships, 2025 World Athletics Championships, 2025 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship and 2025 FIVB Volleyball Women's World Championship are some of the numerous tournaments that will be in 2025 that have articles. As I have already mentioned, you can't just pick and choose. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 11:32, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete way WP:TOOSOON. WP:OSE isn't a reason to keep this, it's a reason to get rid of most of the other articles listed in the comment above. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nom.TheBritinator (talk) 16:43, 28 December 2023 (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 Women's World Floorball Championship. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:56, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2027 Women's World Floorball Championships

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

Event is happening in 2027 as of now it's WP:TOOSOON. Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Sports. Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Finland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2027 FIFA Women's World Cup, 2027 FIBA Basketball World Cup, 2027 Rugby World Cup and 2027 World Women's Handball Championship, 2027 World Men's Handball Championship are some of the numerous tournaments that will be in 2027 that have articles (there are a lot more prestigious World and European championships in 2027 also). As I have already mentioned, you can't just pick and choose. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 11:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ - This appears to be wildly WP:TOOSOON given the dearth of information about the event at this point. Even the primary source talks about plans rather than using any more definite language. No prejudice towards recreation once actual information begins to appear in reliable sources. I'll also note that existence of other stuff is a notoriously bad argument in an AfD discussion. As for alternatives to deletion, draftification is unlikely to work given the temporal distance. I'd be open to merging/redirecting if someone can identify a good target. -Ljleppan (talk) 10:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women's World Floorball Championship looks like a sensible redirect target, so I'm changing my !vote to Redirect to Women's World Floorball Championship as an alternative to deletion. -Ljleppan (talk) 08:34, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:31, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 06:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Women's World Floorball Championship as an ATD per Ljleppan. CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precisionary Instruments

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

Fails NCORP. The only coverage I could find or that is cited in the article is trivial. For example, sources 4 and 5 merely establish that the company's products exist. Source 2 is trivial coverage about moving the company's headquarters. A Bloomberg company profile does not establish notability. The remaining sources do not fare any better. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Science, Biology, and Massachusetts. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There's a few sources that confirm that the product of the company exits. The article about company moving its headquarter is not trivial, the article discussed about the company. Existing references can be replaced or poorly sourced material can be removed. HxxxM07 (talk) 03:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: That something exists is neither evidence of notability nor meets any notability criteria. I agree that the source about the headquarters moving is trivial. As far as HxxxM07's assertion that existing references can be replaced and poorly sourced material can be removed, that is so, but not only does that have no bearing one way or another upon notability issues, as the article creator, they should be more focused on improving this article than on suggesting that others bring it up to snuff themselves. I concur with the nom that the subject fails NCORP, and that the sources presented do not satisfy the GNG. Ravenswing 11:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I will make necessary changes. Re-evaluate the article after I done with changes. If it fails to meet notability criteria then delete it as per Wikipedia policies. HxxxM07 (talk) 14:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfD discussions are usually open for seven days and then the discussion will be evaluated by an admin to see if there is consensus to delete, keep, or do something else (such as merge or redirect). Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 14:51, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete After checking the sources, I believe this was/is also eligible for CSD WP:A7. Needless to say, a company moving is routine coverage. Darcyisverycute (talk) 19:20, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with A7. "Credible claim of significance" is a much lower bar than notability, and the claim that the subject is "US based company that specialises in producing laboratory equipments such as vibratome and microtome" meets that bar. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ngozi Iwere

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

Fails WP:NBLP Ibjaja055 (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft so that the flowery language and incorrect titles can be fixed. Appears to be notable as an AIDS activist in the country, enough mentions in Gnews alone. But wow does this need a re-write. Oaktree b (talk) 20:09, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b Hi there, I have, as a matter of fact, cleaned-up the article. You should check it out. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Journalism, Medicine, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:21, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: as well-sourced and by notability shown above बिनोद थारू (talk) 01:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Clearly passes WP:GNG. PS: I have reworked the article. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Trying to weigh arguments on Keeping vs. Draftifying this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:07, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep influential in forming the Society for Women and AIDS in Africa, Founder and executive director of the community life project, a Nigerian NGO, an authoritative voice in news articles e.g., [33], [34], [35]. Author and subject of articles in scholarly journals. Recipient of the MacArthur Foundation Award. This is enough to satisfy WP:BIO, but needs further clean up and expansion.Polyamorph (talk) 20:49, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was Withdrawn‎. (non-admin closure) Uhai (talk) 03:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Francisco J. Blanco

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails every point of WP:NACADEMIC along with WP:GNG. Uhai (talk) 01:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Science, Biology, and Spain. Uhai (talk) 01:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Very clear pass of WP:Prof#C1. Nominator is advised to carry out WP:before before making further nominations. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC).[reply]
Please do not make bad faith accusations that I did not perform a WP:BEFORE when this was a misunderstanding of arcane notability criteria significantly different than other notability criteria. Uhai (talk) 03:16, 28 December 2023 (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 List of ships of the Confederate States Navy. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

White Cloud (steamship)

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

Transport ship used by the Confederates and captured during the Civil War. From the same sockmaster that brought us CSS Ida (AfD discussion) and CSS Manassas (clipper) (AfD discussion). A sock was responsible for CSS Jeff Davis (1863 steamship) (AfD discussion). As it is, we have no context for this vessel except for the three sentences taken from DANFS. Silverstone's Warships of the Civil War Navies devotes a single sentence to this vessel. Lytle's "Merchant Steam Vessels of the United States 1807-1868" lists 5 White Clouds and a White Cloud No. 2; this is apparently a different White Cloud as that one was in Union service during the 1862 Ft. Donelson campaign but this one was not captured from the CSA until 1863. There's so little to work with her that I think expansion would be almost impossible due to the inability to distinguish this ship from others with the same name. Hog Farm _Talk 01:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Transportation. Hog Farm _Talk 01:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect If significant coverage in reliable sources (and, no, including it in a registry book doesn't count as significant coverage) can't be shown, then it fails to meet WP:GNG, the basic notability requirement considered before even any possible higher requirements, like WP:CORP for corporation articles. I feel like there's quite a few insignificant ship articles that are sourced only to single lines in registry books floating around that should be redirected to some list article instead. Silver seren^C 01:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, United States of America, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of ships of the Confederate States Navy. Too little sourced info or notability to justify a standalone article. Merging to the list page would allow retention of a sentence or two of referenced info, and put this vessel in appropriate context as one of dozens of similar craft that saw similar Confederate service. -- Euryalus (talk) 01:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The tricky part is that it would be problematic to leave a redirect pointing to the CSA ships page at the current title. There were other steamships of this name, including the apparently distinct Union one referenced at the Battle of St. Charles article so there's no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here for the leftover redirect. I also have concerns about WP:DUEWEIGHT; there were scores of ships used in this fashion by the CSA and there needs to be some sort of inclusion criteria for the list. Hog Farm _Talk 01:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - I guess, though there's probably not an infinite number of such vessels. Might be an interesting starting point for a future Confederate steamship editor? But perhaps I'm too optimistic. As a second choice, we could merge the one or two lines of additional info on this article into USS New Era, where the capture is already mentioned. -- Euryalus (talk) 02:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - See AFD CSS Manassas (clipper) Same blocked sock master. Not enough content to keep this. — Maile (talk) 02:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of ships of the Confederate States Navy unless proper sourcing can be found. Article is completely unsourced and fails WP:V. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge content to List of ships of the Confederate States Navy per Euryalus, with or without redirect - the sourcing for that is fine. If there are multiple targets, better to replace with List of ships named White Cloud if other targets materialise. Davidships (talk) 15:20, 29 December 2023 (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 Scott Adams. as an ATD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reframe Your Brain: The User Interface for Happiness and Success

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

Doesn't pass WP:NBOOK. After controversial statements from the author, the publisher decided not to publish it; the author chose to self-publish in August 2023. Aside from the one review from a small newspaper, I haven't found any coverage aside from the controversy, which is discussed on the author's page. I've checked for reviews on Kirkus, Booklist, Publishers Weekly, and NY Times, as well as a general Google search. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep subject is notable. Eric Carpenter (talk) 02:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Eric Carpenter! Can you provide evidence to show that the book meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for books? If you can find three reliable, independent sources with significant coverage of this book, I'll happily withdraw the nomination. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 06:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not an article-worthy topic in its own right, i.e., not apart from the downturn in the author's career. The relevant subsection of the bio page already says pretty much everything that needs to be said about the book, and it takes less than two sentences to do so. XOR'easter (talk) 16:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:31, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Scott Adams: Book isn't notable, is a piece of the Adams life story though Oaktree b (talk) 00:54, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or just !delete, for all that's listed here, it's hardly worth even keeping around. Oaktree b (talk) 20:43, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Scott Adams: there's nothing to merge. Other than the opening line, which is already covered by the target, the entire article is a content fork of Scott Adams#Race, and has nothing to do with the book. Owen× ☎ 01:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator. The entire substance of the article is a separate news story which, as XOR'easter described above, is already detailed at the author's article. The book itself has no notability and fails WP:NBOOK. The central story here is the author's loss of a publishing contract, not the book itself. Delete. Οἶδα (talk) 20:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Scott Adams per User:OwenX above, reasonable search term but not independent notability given the lack of reviews or similar coverage. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge‎ to CSS Manassas. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:23, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CSS Manassas (clipper)

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

I don't see how this can be notable. We've got the short DANFS entry, which is what the article consists of (public domain copying). Silverstone's Warships of the Civil War Navies simply repackages the DANFS info into other words. This US gov't public domain source has Former USLHT Minot, now known as CSS Manassas, is placed under the command of Lieutenant William H. Murdaugh, CSN by Flag-Officer Samuel Barron, CSN. Though her final disposition is unknown, she is known to have seen service off North Carolina for the Confederates as Manassas into early 1862. While that source does solve DANFS' confusion about the lack of a revenue cutter named Minot by stating that she was a lighthouse tender, this CS service was either almost entirely undocumented or rather insignificant. Nothing in Trotter's Ironclads and Columbiads; nor in Barrett's Civil War in North Carolina. Aside from the two above, I can only find passing mentions to its seizure. Searching for this vessel as the lighthouse tender Minot also turns up no further in-depth coverage. The fact that I could turn up what I could for CSS Junaluska but almost nothing for this one reinforces my belief that there is simply not enough known about this vessel to indicate notability. Hog Farm _Talk 00:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and North Carolina. Hog Farm _Talk 00:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Transportation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of ships of the Confederate States Navy. Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of ships of the Confederate States Navy. The editor who created this is a sock, and was just blocked. The sock master account has also just been globally locked. I don't see any encyclopedia advantage in keeping this. — Maile (talk) 02:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also see: AFD White Cloud (steamship). Same blocked sock created both. — Maile (talk) 02:51, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The status of that editor is irrelevant here. - Davidships (talk) 14:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into CSS Manassas, unless more sources are found. The DANFS covers both ships in one entry, so we should probably do the same. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 02:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge content into CSS Manassas (with or without leaving a redirect); it is important that this vessel's existence is included to avoid confusion betweeen the two vessels. The content may yet garner some modest expansion - the late Tim Colton found a little data on Minot here (60ldt, built 1857 [for the United States Lighthouse Board] and sold in 1860). - Davidships (talk) 14:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the CSS Manassas article per Davidships. -- Euryalus (talk) 09:33, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 13:30, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bond markets in East Asia and South East Asia

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

Although the Asian Development Bank in the external links is a reliable source I am not sure that is enough. Article has been tagged as unsourced for over a decade - I did a Google search and the subject does not seem to be notable in itself. I am not an expert but nowadays don’t they talk about individual countries like ‘panda bonds’ and so on? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:09, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: While this discussion appears to have no quorum, it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it has been previously PROD'd (via summary).

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not a manual. The article is entirely unsourced, and reads like original research, and it seems like a very promotional tone. I cannot find any information about this topic that isn't routine news coverage or how-to manuals. Darcyisverycute (talk) 09:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It seems almost like a guide/press release to me, if it could be significantly rewritten it could maybe qualify (but from a source look-up I am not sure there is enough), but for now it seems like a lost cause. Geardona (talk) 03:40, 28 December 2023 (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.

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 __TOC__
 <!-- Add new entries to the TOP of the following list -->
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kumarasamy Visalini}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Divine name}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ballydonoghue GAA}}<!--Relisted-->