Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:47, 21 December 2023

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

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

If possible, please use one of these instead:

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

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

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

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

Further information

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

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

Purge page cache

watch

People

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

The result was delete‎. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kristie Puckett-Williams

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

Sources don't do enough to establish her as a notable person. The subject has also edited the article themselves. LynxesDesmond 🐈 (talk) 23:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and North Carolina. LynxesDesmond 🐈 (talk) 23:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Haven't decided on keep or delete yet. But for reference, if you google her, a lot of the sources will be from the 16 Feb firing, e.g. [1][2][3]. There are however also coverages of her previous activities for example from Charlotte Post, Raleigh, etc. None of these are really good RS. They do, however, probably count as RS. I think that the biography as it stands is hghly inappropiate and laudatory/undue, and does require a careful rewrite by someone very familiar with BLP. However, that isn't relevant to notability. Disclaimer: I was made aware of the discussion off-wiki. Fermiboson (talk) 23:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I noticed a mass-removal of content and sources, along with the addition of a questionable source [4] to the article, ten minutes before this article was nominated for deletion, because of the WP:BLP issues that seem to be presented by the low-quality source added and the sensationalized content; a higher-quality source is available about her firing, i.e. [5] North State Journal, but this contentious event does not seem to be covered extensively in high-quality reliable sources. Beccaynr (talk) 23:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I have gone through the sources and added others (including some mentioned above). There are features on her conversion from crime to advocate, as well as several stories about her firing. There is enough consistent and significant coverage for notability.
Delete - WP:BLP policy considerations influence my view on this article at this time, because in addition to low-quality, sensationalized sources about her apparent firing from the ACLU, her WP:BASIC/WP:GNG notability appears to be borderline according to other available sources. The two independent and reliable sources supporting substantial content in the article are similar: "Without bail money, she pleaded guilty so she wouldn't give birth in jail" (News & Observer, 2019), and Pulitzer Center-funded reporting "Turning trauma behind bars into advocacy for formerly incarcerated" (Charlotte Post, 2021). These sources feature her surviving abuse and addiction, are based on interviews with her, and conclude with a focus on her ACLU advocacy work. Other sources in the article about her advocacy and activism are news reports with her providing quotes, often in her role as an ACLU employee, which help generally track her career development, although it is not clear based on the sources when she started work at the ACLU nor when she was promoted into various roles. In February 2023, there was an incident that seems to have been sensationalized, particularly by low-quality sources such as the John Locke Foundation's Carolina Journal linked above, which does not appear to have editorial standards published on its website, and its reporting on the incident seems particularly poor; the local alternative newspaper linked above does not seem to do much better in supporting contentious content in a BLP. I have added an NPR source that provides some context and seems to offer more neutral reporting on the incident, without using the term "fired," to support one line about her no longer working for the ACLU, which from my view, seems due according to available sources, the size of the article, and BLP policy. Overall, the notability guideline asks us to consider whether we can write a fair and balanced article; with the available sources - primarily based on interviews and quotes in various news reports, as well as a short-term flurry of sensationalized reporting about her departure from the ACLU - it does not appear possible to do so at this time. Beccaynr (talk) 14:49, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Beccaynr (talk) 15:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: SInce this can't be Soft Deleted, I'd like to see more support before closing this discussion as a Delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:05, 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) 22:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Incarceration_of_women_in_the_United_States#Advocacy_organizations: in that section, the ACLU and Puckett-Williams' advocacy work more than qualify for a mention based on our existing sources. Once she receives more coverage that establishes independent notability (and I certainly hope she does!), we can easily revive the standalone article. Owen× ☎ 23:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think the available sources will help develop much content at the suggested merge target. One of the two in-depth sources about Puckett-Williams, The News Observer, only mentions she is a "Regional Field Organizer for the ACLU of NC’s Campaign for Smart Justice, advocating for bail reform" and relies on her statement for the description of the "biggest part of her work" as "changing perceptions about people who commit felonies" - this source is about her biography, not the ACLU program.
The other in-depth source, The Charlotte Post, is also about her biography, and mentions she is the "statewide campaign for smart justice manager at the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina" and states she "advocates for legislation like the North Carolina House Bill 608, Dignity for Women Who are Incarcerated. HB 608 was introduced in April and passed 113-0 in May," and mentions several specifics of the legislation, but the ACLU program is not the focus of the source or discussed in depth.
I think the suggested merge target may benefit from retitling (the programs listed in the Advocacy organizations section appear to be treatment programs, sourced to a 2003 book) and/or further development, but the biographically-focused sources in this article do not seem specifically helpful for developing content in an article focused on programs generally. Beccaynr (talk) 02:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, which is why I said she and the ACLU deserve "a mention" in the target article based on our existing sources. The difference between us now is whether or not to leave a redirect to the target from the current page. I see no reason to prevent someone searching for her name from being redirected to our page about the incarceration of women, where her name would receive a brief mention along with the work of the ACLU. Owen× ☎ 11:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify my view, the suggested merge target describes direct services for individuals, while the ACLU of NC engages in what could be described as systems advocacy (changing policies, laws, etc). While the suggested merge target uses the term "System organizations" it then quickly clarifies by describing individual-focused programs. My sense, based on the content in the article, is that the 2003 book may be referring to a common concept of working with a client as a whole person - there is a holistic form of practice, where addressing multiple issues (i.e. "the system"), including housing, public benefits, transportation, mental health treatment, etc, are seen as necessary components of supporting someone in their reentry, or whatever their presenting issue may be.
This is very different than advocacy for bail reform or legislation. So the unfortunate reason a merge/mention does not seem suitable is because this suggested target is not describing systems advocacy, a new section would need to be developed, and we do not have sources available from this article to do that. Also, the NC ACLU Campaign for Smart Justice is not specifically focused on women, so it would not necessarily be a program that would be expanded into a new section at the suggested merge target. Beccaynr (talk) 16:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are free to add new sections or expand existing ones in the target article as we see fit and as reliable sources allow us. We already have more than enough to verify the work of Puckett-Williams, and—I believe—to add a brief mention of her work, either in the existing Advocacy organizations section or under a new section in the target. I understand the distinction you make between system- and individual- advocacy programs. I do not, however, think our best approach for those searching Wikipedia for "Puckett-Williams" is to leave them with a "No results found" message. I'm sure we can come up with a sentence or two that are supported by RS about her work, allowing us to turn Kristie Puckett-Williams into a redirect to Incarceration of women in the United States. Owen× ☎ 17:12, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are some examples of systems advocacy organizations that could be reviewed to determine whether their work includes a focus on issues specifically related to incarceration of women in the United States:
ACLU National Prison Project

Center for Constitutional Rights / Mass Incarceration

Center on Juvenile & Criminal Justice

Prison Law Office

Prison Policy Initiative

The Sentencing Project

Vera

These organizations, and coverage of their work, may help develop a section broadly discussing systems advocacy in the suggested merge target. A brief mention of Puckett-Williams participating in advocacy may not be due, assuming a new section is created. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a suitable merge target available at this time. Beccaynr (talk) 20:39, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, let's get more participation here!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking for information about Kristie Puckett-Williams as I am a minister writing about the power of people with lived experience acting as advocates. It is important that articles about people like her remain on Wikipedia. She has changed many lives in North Carolina and beyond as an independent advocate, which makes her notable! 2600:1700:8434:280:944F:E0B5:80A3:5BB0 (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed important that the work of such people get publicized, and as I mentioned above, I truly hope she gains more publicity. However, Wikipedia is strictly a neutral-point-of-view encyclopedia. This means that no matter how important and dear to our heart the cause is, we must stick to our objective standards of notability. Otherwise, the encyclopedia will quickly lose its reputation as an unbiased resource. Owen× ☎ 18:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per Beccaynr's analysis of the sources. She can be mentioned in other articles, but I agree the content covered by the sources isn't direct enough to warrant merging. It also suffers from promo-speak; if we are going to add material about her anywhere it should be in the words of an independent secondary commenter.

JoelleJay (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Beccaynr's excellent analysis of the sources above, which I believe is the most persuasive view in this discussion per our P&G's. Happy to support the views of JoelleJay etc. that merging isn't appropriate given current state of the content, and therefore deletion is preferred. Daniel (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Beccaynr. Rusty4321 ^{talk contribs} 00:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete largely per Beccaynr. I agree with their analysis of the sourcing, and I share the same GNG and perhaps more importantly BLP concerns. I also agree with JoelleJay that a blanket merge isn't appropriate in the circumstances. Mentioning Puckett-Williams and her activities whenever such content passes WP:DUE is of course fine, I just can't think of anywhere offhand where that would be the case. Maybe in the future there will be sufficient sourcing to make a fair and balanced article about her, but not at this time. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Beccaynr - somewhat reluctantly; women of colour face intrinsic barriers to getting Wikipedia coverage and we should ask ourselves if we would treat the article in the same way if it were about a white man. (But I think the answer is yes, we would!) Nwhyte (talk) 09:41, 19 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. Daniel (talk) 03:36, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Edi Swasono

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

Fails WP:NECONOMIST, no significant coverage found online. Article also seems a little too favourable towards the subject. Sgubaldo (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Economics, and Indonesia. Sgubaldo (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This Indonesian economist passes (weakly) WP:Prof and WP:GNG. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC).[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 07:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:NPOL, was a member of the MPR (national parliament) in the late 1980s [6] [7]. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 10:34, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as he was the part of People's Consultative Assembly, he will pass notability by WP:NPOL. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:59, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:NPOL.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:46, 27 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. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:13, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rhenald Kasali

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

Fails WP:NACADEMIC, no significant coverage found online. Sgubaldo (talk) 21:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Businesspeople. Sgubaldo (talk) 21:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. He has a profile on Google Scholar and it says that he has h-index of 29 with 7692 citations. I don't know what is the threshold for notability, but for me it seems pretty impressive. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:11, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
h-index is not a great measure of determining reputation. The average h-index will vary quite a bit by discipline for example. It's also specifically noted here that h-index is of limited usefulness in determining notability for academics. Sgubaldo (talk) 01:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes W:Prof#C1. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. The citation numbers are strong enough for WP:PROF#C1 regardless, but I'm especially impressed that he is getting numbers like that for work written in Indonesian. Usually using localized languages for academic work significantly reduces its citability. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:34, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further discussion around PROF#C1.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The sources that are currently in the article look very bad. I trust David Eppstein's assessment though. Geschichte (talk) 11:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 12:02, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:NACADEMIC. Over 7700 citations per Google Scholar ans 29 h-index.Perfectstrangerz (talk) 02:57, 12 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. ✗plicit 23:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wahyu Aditya

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

Tagged for notability since 2011, the subject fails WP:CREATIVE. There may be some sources in Indonesian that I've missed, but I can't find any significant coverage online. Sgubaldo (talk) 20:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Arts, Comics and animation, and Indonesia. Sgubaldo (talk) 20:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are a few articles in Indonesian, but I looked into it and there are only interviews, WP:PRIMARY. Suitskvarts (talk) 09:58, 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. (non-admin closure) Let'srun (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Norm Glockson

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

Despite playing in Major League Baseball and the National Football League, this subject appears to not meet the WP:GNG or WP:SPORTBASIC. Let'srun (talk) 16:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, American football, Baseball, and Illinois. Let'srun (talk) 16:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I don't understand how you were unable to find coverage of Glockson - a two-sport top-level professional athlete - Newspapers.com has extensive coverage of him, e.g. [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] e t c. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per BeanieFan11. Passes GNG. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep' per Newspapers.com citations BeanieFan11 has shown and that I can see by searching the database. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:17, 21 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 speedy deleted‎ by Jimfbleak as per WP:G11. (non-admin closure) CptViraj (talk) 14:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Aravindan Selvaraj

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

not ready for mainspace, incubate in draftspace. Reason/s: no sources) Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 13:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 13:54, 21 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 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!} 03:33, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Narendra Bhooshan

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

An IAS does not automatically make someone notable. More WP:SIGCOV is required to support his notability. Macbeejack ☎ 06:42, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Macbeejack ☎ 06:42, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This would not be discussed if it were an American civil servant. However I am not familiar enough with the Indian media landscape to locate sources of improvement. Geschichte (talk) 08:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:02, 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!} 06:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: non-notable functionary, reads as PROMO. Sourcing is simply discussion of things the person is involved with or discussion of promotions. Oaktree b (talk) 16:23, 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. 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 [14] as well as shorter, but informative pieces in [15], [16]. 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. [17]). 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 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 ([18]) 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 Bahuchara Mata or a section therein Star Mississippi 21:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bapaiya

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

This is a contested draftification. The subject does not appear to be notable, as none of the sources provide significant coverage of the subject, only passing references. A check before the nomination turned up no other useful sources I could find to establish notability. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Mythology, and Gujarat. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping for Be Brave AI, who created/moved the article into mainspace. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bahuchara Mata as an WP:ATD for now. Geschichte (talk) 11:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect a minor character in the goddess' legend.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 07:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question At the suggested target, Bapaiya only appears in the footnotes, while the spelling Bapiya appears in the article text. Is that a mistake or a spelling variant? If the latter, a redirect should probably point to an WP:Anchor. Daranios (talk) 10:41, 25 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) 04:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Raiter

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

Faiils WP:BIO. Sources are mainly primary. LibStar (talk) 05:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 05:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Pakistan, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep -- This issue should not be the quality of the sources, but whether the subject is notable. He was for 5 years the principle of a Bible College. Bible colleges (in US seminaries) are often small independent academic institutions, but they ought not to be judged merely by size in comparison with institutions teaching a wider range of subjects. Three of his predecessors have articles, but others do not. Not being in Australia or Vanutu (where he founded another), I am not qualified to judge his notability. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:29, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Still need sources to establish notability. LibStar (talk) 02:42, 25 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!} 06:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per Peterkingiron. This is someone who may be considered notable despite not clearing GNG's conventions. I'm reading this subject in the way we generally give leeway to bishops in significant denominations. Sourcing confirms that this person does exist and did hold some fairly notable positions. ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of the positions held confer inherent notability. LibStar (talk) 16:05, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It's possible that Stirrings of the Soul may meet WP:NBOOK given it won an award, though online RS reviews seem thin. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 05:46, 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!} 08:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- As far as I can see, the subject fails WP:BIO and I don't see any other notability criteria that are met. I don't see that WP:BOOK is met. A reading of the award process (self-nomination and an entry fee required) and its criteria does not convey obvious notability. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 02:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - he's a well-known Anglican evangelist and preacher in Australia, was principal of a Bible College in Australia too which has notability in other countries. If there's no consensus to keep then please merge to Melbourne School of Theology to preserve the history of the article. Cavepavonem (talk) 10:51, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"well-known Anglican evangelist and preacher in Australia, was principal of a Bible College" are not criteria for notability. LibStar (talk) 11:34, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only applicable notability guideline is GNG, it requires in-depth coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, and we do not have that. All the blathering in earlier contributions to this discussion about how we should ignore the guidelines and consider him notable because he's notable is content-free, circular, and should be disregarded. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:12, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to consider Merge option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep He's discussed in a few textbooks [19], [20], with a quote in this one [21]. For such a small field of study, he's somewhat well-known. Oaktree b (talk) 16:00, 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 keep‎. TLA (talk) 03:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Meaby

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

Not notable individual, lack of independent SIGCOV GraziePrego (talk) 02:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and United Kingdom. GraziePrego (talk) 02:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Full obituary in a major national newspaper. We have always considered this to be sufficient for notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:04, 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!} 02:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Youth Hostels Association (England & Wales): Fails GNG and NBIO. Single source in article is OBIT, with all the normal issues that go with using OBITs as sources. BEFORE showed nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Ping me if SIGCOV sources from WP:IS are added to the article. GNG requires multiple, IS, SIGCOV, sources. // Timothy :: talk 18:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- There is absolutely nothing wrong with using obits in national newspapers as sources. Not sure why you think there is. By capitalising, you seem to be suggesting that the page you want is WP:OBIT, which I'm sure isn't it given it has no relevance to this article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I expanded the article and added more sources. Although I would like to see additional sources (especially on his work designing railroad carriages), I am convinced that Meaby is notable and worthy of coverage beyond the suggested link to the organization's article. I also agree that a bi-line obituary in The Guardian pretty much proves notability. Rublamb (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, to consider recent expansion/addition of sources by Rublamb.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Based on the Obituary and expanded sources, this would suffice. Perfectstrangerz (talk) 02:30, 12 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 and salt. Daniel (talk) 19:48, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Miles Cheong

AfDs for this article:

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

Recreated yet again, this time substantially worse than the last version. Not seeing how this passes notability when the much more extensively referenced version that was up for deletion previously (see this archive from the wayback machine) got deleted. As with last time, there's a lot of passing references, but basically no in depth coverage by reliable sources. I would recommend WP:SALTING. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's unfortunate, because there is a lot to talk about Cheong, including a lot of criticism, but this page is such a paltry stub. Tooncool64 (talk) 19:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, Video games, Politics, Malaysia, and United States of America. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hemiauchenia: have you just removed the WP:A7 tag? Why? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 19:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's been contested, and people are going to keep recreating it, so I think requesting SALTING is the best idea. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:06, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that makes sense. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 19:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete and salt I really have no clue what could possibly be added that renders the AfD of last month invalid. This is more of a procedural matter than something up for debate. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Again? Delete for same reasons as last time, and that nothing new has happened in the last month to increase notability. SALT also. Oaktree b (talk) 21:14, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Subject has enough sources for a stub article.Eric Carpenter (talk) 22:26, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete and salt per ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ and Oaktree b. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedily delete and salt You're kidding me. Again?! See the previous 2 AfDs; nothing has changed. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt Pay-for-play provocateur who will never visit the place they criticize the most and whose current writing is otherwise stuck on a dying platform. Nate • (chatter) 02:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah... I'm inclined to agree. At worst, his article could be used to spam his dying platform. Using Wikipedia to fuel bad actors is kind of the reason they salted Chris Chan's article, from what I'm given to believe. It's only consistent to salt this guy, too. George Mucus (talk) 14:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt per last AFD's conclusion less than 2 months ago. Sergecross73 msg me 02:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt on procedural grounds. TompaDompa (talk) 16:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete and salt per the above. Left guide (talk) 10:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete, clear case of G4. Belichickoverbrady (talk) 04:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt simply because it has never been made with substantiating sources. While he *is* a highly influential journalist in alt right circles, the brouhaha about his page on here has me inclined to believe it'll be more trouble to keep having this discussion than the tiny article's unsubstantiated sources warrant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by George Mucus (talk • contribs) 14:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Salt and delete - per all above. Videogameplayer99 (talk) 11:33, 26 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. It looks like this article has been remade since its nomination and I see a consensus to Keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shay Kanot

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

Created by a banned editor, but worked on by other editors since. I can't find any indication that this passes WP:DIRECTOR. The citations used in the article only reference them in passing so it would appear that this fails WP:NBASIC also. TarnishedPath^talk 12:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Film, and Israel. TarnishedPath^talk 12:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Most mentions are about his films, nothing about him, and are trivial one-liners (XYZ Film by Shay Kanot). I can't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Easy pass of DIRECTOR #3. Maybe also DIRECTOR 4c. AFDISNOTCLEANUP. gidonb (talk) 02:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable in some Israeli sources, especially after seeing search results for the Hebrew name. Also as stated above, could reasonably pass DIRECTOR#3. Toadette ^{(Happy holiday!)} 07:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I originally came across this page (Special:PermanentLink/1189701926) during NPP and was ready to PROD it or draftify it but then my analysis looked like it still might've been notable in Hebrew sources but I can't read Hebrew so I thought I would give it a go and at least WP:FIXIT and clean it up to article standards—I was feeling generous and was in need of a Wiki-project for the day. The analysis above is correct: the sources I was able to find in English only have passing mention and alone probably don't satisfy GNG. Once I had the article acceptable, I went to de-orphan it and link to other mentions and then found his most notable project Kicking Out Shoshana also had NPOV concerns that I felt needed to be addressed. So to learn know that the creator was blocked doesn't surprise me. What I will say is that—as probably the most significant editor of the page since the other editor's article creation and then subsequent block—I don't want my edits of the page to be construed as any endorsement of !keep, nor should they prevent a !proceduraldelete as a result of the block. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 15:13, 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) 19:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I took a look at the sources, and I'm feeling okay. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above, although the page needs styling editing. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:34, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep though page definitely needs some work, person is notable enough from looks of it (has done several films and is a director). Homerethegreat (talk) 19:51, 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. Star Mississippi 03:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Ul Arfeen Siddiqui

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

Fails GNG and NBIO. See [22] prior deletion log.

Source eval:

Comments	Source
Geneology page	1. "Family & Lineage of Shaykh ul Aalam". Retrieved 2023-12-16.
Conference speaker announcement, nothing WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	2. ^ "Faizan Islam Institute London organized a conference on the arrival of Allama Dr. Pir Sultan Al-Arifin Siddiqui in Britain". Daily Pakistan. 2022-03-28. Retrieved 2023-12-16.
Annoucement about a visit. Fails WP:IS WP:RS no WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	3. ^ "Arrival of Sajjad Nasheen Niryan Sharif Pir Sultan Al-Arifin Siddiqui in Britain". jang.com.pk. Retrieved 2023-12-16.
Annoucement about a visit. Fails WP:IS WP:RS no WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	4. ^ "pir sultan ul arifeen visited zia ul ummah". World News TV "United Kingdom" (in Urdu). 2017-10-11. Retrieved 2023-12-16.
Annoucement about a visit and speaking engagement. Fails WP:IS WP:RS no WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	5. ^ "The three-day Urs will begin today at Dargah Nirian Sharif Tarakhil". dailyausaf.com. Retrieved 2023-12-16.
Annoucement about a visit and speaking engagement. Fails WP:IS WP:RS no WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	6. ^ "Pir Sultan-ul-Arfeen Siddiqui (DBA) Visited SEC". Retrieved 2023-12-16.

BEFORE showed nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 06:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Islam, and Pakistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment it's unclear what makes him notable? I don't see any proper source that confirms his biography,
حقائق کا پتہ لگانے والا (talk) 12:44, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep he is notable. He is current custodian of Nerian Sharif and Chancellor of MIU, MIMC. Notable References: [23], [24], [25], [26] and [27]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teeti7 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC) sock strike. Daniel (talk) 21:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable: sources are reliable like Jung news, Daily Pakistan, word news and aslo from Niwa e Waqt, which i have added recently in the article which was above provided by Teeti but not used as a reference in the article. Skt34 (talk) 15:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC) sock strike. Daniel (talk) 21:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While technically eligible for soft-deletion, the fact this was created only a couple of weeks ago, plus the sockpuppetry here, means unlikely a soft-deletion would 'stick'. Relisting for further input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 06:46, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete based on the source table above, I can't find anything further about this person that would help. Oaktree b (talk) 15:22, 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 draftify‎. Daniel (talk) 06:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Owen Lunt

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

Player currently has no significant coverage and shows no evidence of meeting GNG. PROD denied on the grounds he has a reference from his own club website. Draftify would also be an acceptable option. MarchOfTheGreyhounds 06:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Football, United Kingdom, and England. MarchOfTheGreyhounds 06:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 22:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Drafify - not currently notable, but might be in future. Giant Snowman 22:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – WP:TOOSOON Svartner (talk) 13:37, 23 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. czar 03:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Salman Farhan Sudi

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

Being an official in a ministry of an unrecognised state doesn’t make you notable. Mccapra (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Somalia. Mccapra (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 00:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is under improvement and soon it will be added valuable contents. So I suggest to not delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hawali Nur (talk • contribs) 13:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We add the categories in this page. And soon we will another confirmed data with sources. Hawali Nur (talk) 18:12, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Minor quibble: Puntland is a constituent state of Somalia, it is not a breakaway entity like Somaliland. Curbon7 (talk) 02:13, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 06:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment adding two links to Facebook and another to the homepage of a university isn’t demonstrating notability. Where is the in depth independent coverage of this individual? Mccapra (talk) 06:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete solidly fails GNG. A Google search returns more results on the similarly named Saudi king than it does results for this subject, which are all Facebook and other social media posts anyway. RetroCosmos ^{t • c} 17:14, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have had another look and I am unable to change my mind. With respect, Facebook is a non-starter, and a press release is something that might build upon existing notability but certainly not enough to establish notability. Hawaii Nur, I appreciate your efforts on this article. RetroCosmos ^talk 09:40, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Improvements were made to the article today that would be worth a look. It would help with coming to a closure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:50, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Liz. The sources added are all government press releases listing all similar appointments. They verify that the subject holds the position mentioned in the article. They mention the subject but there is no in depth coverage of him specifically. At AfD routine announcements of an appointment are not regarded as evidence of notability. Mccapra (talk) 08:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no presumed notability available under WP:NPOL as even ministerial directors-general/first secretaries are not recognised there (although to extend Curbon7's point, Puntland is a federal state, so it's ministers would be covered by NPOL). No independent sourcing to indicate satisfies WP:BIO/WP:GNG. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 01:35, 15 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 Khazar rulers#Khazar Khagans (Ashina dynasty). Daniel (talk) 22:17, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Khalga and Kaban

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

This article has lacked sources for 14 years now. This shows a strong possibility of a lack of interest and/or notability on the part of the subject. The article should be deleted until such time that an editor cares enough to find reliable secondary sources, if they exist. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:34, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, and Royalty and nobility. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:34, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not attested to in sources other than the one listed, tells us there are no other sources. I can't find any in my search as well. Oaktree b (talk) 20:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok there's this: [28] a one liner in a chart. Long way from extensive coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 20:44, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good job finding that chart, though. Thanks for contributing.🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:49, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Khazar rulers#Khazar Khagans (Ashina dynasty): where they are detailed with more context. As I stated in this WP:RSN discussion from last year, the Cäğfär Taríxı is a fabrication created by the NKVD to sow division amongst the Tatars during a period of increased nationalism for that group. Curbon7 (talk) 21:47, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Curbon7 That is not a bad solution, but it also seems unnecessary since there are only five articles that link to it, including List of Khazar rulers. They are List of Khazar rulers, Cäğfär Taríxı, Khalga (a redirect), Kaban (a disambiguation page), and List of state leaders in the 7th century. I think it would be cleaner to just delete it entirely. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 23:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects are cheap and alternatives to deletion should always be prioritized if one is clearly available. Curbon7 (talk) 23:58, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Central Asia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. In the text they seem to be between dozens of names like that, so I also doubt notability for each one and I question their pairing for this article. Suitskvarts (talk) 11:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Curbon7. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:49, 25 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 Poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko. The decision whether to merge or not can now be done editorially by any interested editor (and discussed at the talk page of Poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko), as the content has been preseved behind the redirect at Igor the Assassin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Daniel (talk) 22:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Igor the Assassin

AfDs for this article:

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

Having had a read of the sources the article contains, the second source is a tertiary source that quotes News of The World as its source (hardly reliable) and the third source appears to be effectively a blog post that on a read through is incredibly poor quality. The only other source is a book written by the wife of Alexander Litvinenko; I don't have access to the book so can't confirm whether it even discusses "Igor" at all.

Frankly the subject of the article appears to be a complete fabrication by the tabloid press. CoconutOctopus talk 17:31, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete highly speculative without reliable sources castorbailey (talk) 19:28, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as one potential source does not an article make. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 20:46, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko. Absolutely no need for a separate article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue against a merge; I don't think the GA-rated article about the poisoning would benefit from adding tabloid-sourced rumours. CoconutOctopus talk 20:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and add a sentence. I have a copy of the book and it does not mention this supposed person at all. However, this is kind of a weird note, the full name of this supposed assassin (Igor Vlasov) is mentioned in a few sources in the aftermath, having supposedly been on papers he was carrying in the immediate aftermath of the death.
- https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/british-investigators-face-russian-obstacles/
- https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2006-dec-06-fg-poison6-story.html
- He's mentioned in a different book, "The Litvinenko File : Politics, Polonium and Russia's war with itself"
- https://www.smh.com.au/world/poisoned-former-spys-russian-contact-out-of-reach-in-hospital-20061207-gdozts.html
All mention an "Igor Vlasov" as being an initial suspect. Almost certainly more mentions in Russian. Mention as a footnote, maybe? Definitely not a full article but it does seem to have been reliably noted. It does seem like this guy existed. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:30, 20 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. While Owenx makes (in my opinion) a reasonable argument here, it seems consensus disagrees with the assessment of notability derived from those sources presented, and therefore the consensus is to delete. Daniel (talk) 22:25, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide of Dylan Buckner

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

Whilst tragic, article doesn't meet WP:EVENT or WP:GNG CoconutOctopus talk 16:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not meet GNG. Banks Irk (talk) 19:08, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Nate • (chatter) 19:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG castorbailey (talk) 19:30, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:49, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:50, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: the fact that this event is still receiving significant coverage a year and a half after it happened tells me it meets WP:LASTING. I don't see how WP:NOTMEMORIAL is relevant here, considering the broad, persistent media coverage that establishes notability. Owen× ☎ 20:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A half page article about a scholarship named after the person isn't extensive, nor terribly notable. It's rather common to name a scholarship after someone passes away. Oaktree b (talk) 21:00, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
True, it is indeed common to name scholarships that way. It isn't as common for such scholarships to receive national media coverage, and when they do, we generally consider them notable enough for an article here. Owen× ☎ 21:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A handful of articles and stories in the local Chicago press and local news about a scholarship given to an area HS student essentially repeating a press release is not "national media coverage". This is simply not notable. Banks Irk (talk) 01:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PBS is a national network. And while Fox News isn't high on our RS ranks, it is a major national news network. Owen× ☎ 01:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PBS is a toolkit for educators. And Fox news is a useless source in my books, as they lie about what they promote on air. Oaktree b (talk) 15:32, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thankfully, we don't have to rely on Fox News' shoddy accuracy here, as the story is covered by local networks. I only brought it up in response to Banks Irk's claim that coverage was only local. Coverage is national, and reliable local sources can be used to verify the content, as well as assert notability. Owen× ☎ 15:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My point was quite specific: There is not "nationwide media coverage" of the scholarship, which is what you claimed. It is purely local and not notable. Fox can be reliable predicted to run a forgotten non-notable story a year later about "a kid killed himself over Dems' COVID policies". The PBS piece is an interview with one of the kid's teammates, only tangentially related, not about the scholarship at all. Banks Irk (talk) 23:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Initial burst of coverage in 2021 when it happened, then nothing. The student was not notable before dying, nothing much more after. Tragic but nothing for Wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 20:59, 18 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Lowery

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

Fails the general and biography-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, United States of America, and Arizona. UtherSRG (talk) 12:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 12:21, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with nominator. The references are not independent reliable significant secondary coverage, and a search for other sources turns up virtually nothing, and certainly nothing better. Banks Irk (talk) 15:09, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No sources found, all links are to Pokerweb, which isn't enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 18:17, 18 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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Stiebel

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

Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. Note tag. No indication of significance. scope_creep^Talk 13:03, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United Kingdom. CptViraj (talk) 13:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:48, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:48, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:23, 20 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. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 04:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Instigator Ph

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

Subject fails WP: INDEPENDENT. Doesn't merit an article as no publication has been made. Fails WP: BUSINESS Mastashat (talk) 07:06, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. AllyD (talk) 07:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It's the flowery prose used in Nigerian sources that stumps me. They are RS but all sound the same... I'll not !vote until we have more discussion around this fellow, but it's likely a delete from me. Oaktree b (talk) 20:56, 8 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!} 07:44, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the page of the second citation was blocked by eset, so it miiiight be fishy, but I'm not sure whether to keep or delete it. Maybe I'll change my mind later. 109.186.127.121 (talk) 07:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This is an example of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete full of advertorial publications. Ibjaja055 (talk) 12:50, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:00, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: After reading through the citations used, I agree with everyone else that a lot of it appears to be advertorial publications, and in a few of those Anambra State Governor Chukwuma Soludo is mentioned more than Omwumelu who is only mentioned in passing. The only solid reference is the Guardian, with the same reference appearing twice in the reference list. Not enough to establish notability. TarnishedPath^talk 06:23, 18 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. czar 16:15, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sambit Bal

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

Notability. not passed WP:NSPORTS or WP:JOURNALIST. ― ☪ Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 21:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, and Journalism. ― ☪ Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 21:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the subject is definitely a notable journalist and editor. Batagur baska (talk) 22:16, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
comment: Please provide a reason as opposed to saying the equivalent of "It's true because I said so". AriTheHorse 22:49, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you read the article, it clearly indicates the journalistic and editorial notability of the subject. The onus here is on the nominator to say why the subject fails notability, and that has not been done. I do not have to state a rationale, only my opinion, and please do not try to misrepresent my opinion. Batagur baska (talk) 03:16, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Batagur baska The article has no secondary sources. All of them are primary sources. If you have secondary sources that can prove him as a notable, please provide them. ― ☪ Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 20:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and Odisha. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:20, 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!} 23:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the Odia Wikipedia article cites a few independent sources, including this small biography by The Hindu. Left guide (talk) 02:12, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:07, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No evidence of SIGCOV. The piece in The Hindu is a press release announcing an event he spoke at, not IRS coverage.

JoelleJay (talk) 01:11, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Bal is the editor-in-chief of ESPNcricinfo, which, per The Hindu, is "the world's most widely read cricket website" (link). It is perhaps no surprise, then, that a simple Google search for his name turns up tens of thousands of hits—not just the numerous bylines, but articles citing him as an authority (examples), articles directly about him (e.g., 1, 2), and interviews of him (e.g., 1, 2). Whether judged by the general notability guideline, or by WP:JOURNALIST—cited by the nominator, which asks whether The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors—the standard would appear to be met. Incidentally, while the two editors who have voted to delete have claimed, respectively, that The article has no secondary sources and that there is No evidence of SIGCOV, neither indicates what efforts—if any—they undertook to actually look for sources. As Batagur baska correctly states, The onus here is on the nominator to say why the subject fails notability, and that has not been done. See generally WP:BEFORE. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:19, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, Usernameunique, are you voicing an opinion to Keep this article? I see your criticism but not your opinion on what should be done with this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernameunique Please, This is definitely not a widely cited.

The reference to The Hindu is just a press release.
India Times has a category with six news items. His name is not even in one of the titles. Only mentioned once or twice in the news.
India Television, E4M and Afaqs are not independent or notable sources.
Cricket Couch is just a blog. who also writes for ESPN as well.
Since he's written extensively for ESPN and other magazines for over twenty years, it's no big deal to have his name prominent on Google. His own writings do not prove him notable.

― ☪ Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 18:02, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Indian Television and E4M links are the same press release announcing new roles for Bal and another journalist. The "sources" are clearly marketing tools: IT: Apart from conceiving and executing promotional campaigns targeted at the Media, Marketing & Television Trade online, it also offers similar services offline, thus providing clients with a 360 degree media service and marketing solution. E4M: exchange4media was set up in year 2000 with the aim of publishing niche, relevant and quality publications for the marketing, advertising and media professionals. JoelleJay (talk) 19:39, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Subject does not pass the GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Blogs and press releases just won't do. Let'srun (talk) 15:37, 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 delete‎. ✗plicit 23:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ambalavana Navalar

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

Deleted and declined x 4 at Draft:Ambalavana Navalar and created in mainspace. I can find references to texts written by him, but nothing to indicate notability. I'm sure offline non English sourcing may exist, but at the moment this is cross-wiki spam with no ability to establish whether he meets N:AUTHOR or other biographic notability Star Mississippi 20:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and Sri Lanka. Star Mississippi 20:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Scattered mentions in Gbooks, but nothing substantial. Oaktree b (talk) 21:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Questions. Does it have a bearing on notability if his books have been translated into English? If they have, would this likely make him a more acceptable subject for English Wikipedia, than if they haven't (ignoring for now any other aspect of notability)? Rupples (talk) 01:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't. And non English sourcing is fine, but as near as I can tell from Google translate, the Tamil ones don't approach N:Book leading to issues for him as an author or poet. Star Mississippi 01:52, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. This is tricky. The first "exhortation" as its translated in the Tamil Wiki (doesn't look to be part of Wikipedia) is [29]. See page 7, which in translated form under Ambalava Novelist (20th century Area) ties in with what's written in the article. Continues on page 8 and very top of page 9. The book is here: [30]. It's difficult to evaluate whether this is a reliable source. Rupples (talk) 03:16, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This biography does not appear to satisfy author notability on its face, so a check of the references was in order. Reference 1 is a wiki, and so not a reliable source. References 2 and 4 are images from a book, and are the same, but cannot be machine-translated. They are probably by the subject rather than about the subject. The third reference can be machine-translated, and appears to be by the subject rather than about the subject.

Reference Number	Reference	Comments	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Secondary
1	tamil.wiki/	The source is a wiki, and cannot be considered a reliable source.	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
2	archive.org/details/SatgurumanimalaiAmbalavanaNavalar1912	An image of an article in a book. Because it is an image, it cannot be machine-translated, and so cannot be treated as a reliable source.	Probably	Probably	No	Probably
3	shaivam.org/scripture/Tamil	This appears to be a translation of a writing by the subject.	Yes	Not about the subject	Unknown	Probably
4	archive.org/details/SatgurumanimalaiAmbalavanaNavalar1912	Same as 2	Probably	Probably	No	Probably

So the article does not appear to be supported by the references, at least not if verifiability and notability are observed. The subject may be notable based on other sources, so draftification would be in order, except that there is already a declined draft. This article is a better draft than the current draft, and so can reasonably replace the current draft. The submitter should be warned that tendentiously resubmitting a draft without improving it is disruptive and may lead to sanctions. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator comment if it can be verified that he started Vaddukoddai Hindu College, that could be a redirect target. However that article has issues of its own which I've just tried to address. Star Mississippi 15:23, 19 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 Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kathleen M. O'Sullivan

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

Discussed in a bulk nomination here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kathleen Marie Sweet, which was closed as keep for essentially procedural reasons. O'Sullivan's notability was not specifically discussed. Neither the planned nor actual nomination by Presidents Obama and Trump were successful, and I see no other path to notability for this attorney. Star Mississippi 17:54, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and Law. Star Mississippi 17:54, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: New York and Washington. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:05, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. In the previous mass-nomination, I noted that this subject "was nominated by one president and then declared, but not submitted, as a nominee by the next president, which is also a highly unusual and noteworthy circumstance". While I do think that this adds an extra layer of possible notability, I think the correct outcome here is to merge to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies, with a note indicating that the subject was also proposed, but not formally nominated, by President Trump. BD2412 T 18:08, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. Subject is not notable enough for a standalone article, but here we have a related article as a ATD with regards to her failed judicial nomination, and a sentence noting her failure to be renominated under Trump can be included there as well. User:Let'srun 15:51, 17 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!} 02:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Kee (lawyer)

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

The role does not seem significant enough to merit mention at Human Rights Commission (New Zealand), where Commissioners are named. I see no other route to biographic notability as it news coverage seemed to come from the appointment Star Mississippi 03:13, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Law, and New Zealand. Star Mississippi 03:13, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can't find sources demonstrating that he meets WP:GNG, WP:BASIC or WP:ANYBIO from a WP:BEFORE search. Looks like he's been a Tenancy Tribunal adjudicator in recent years, which is a fairly low-level judicial appointment (the tribunal doesn't even have a Wikipedia page; arguably it should, but kind of demonstrates that the role doesn't add anything to notability). The press around his appointment to an HRC role (and not even the top role!) was mainly about the fact that he was appointed instead of a woman lawyer recommended by officials.

Also seems the article creator was blocked for sockpuppeting during which they created several articles about non-notable alumni from St Peter's College... Chocmilk03 (talk) 04:39, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-notable. The association with St Peter's College also struck me. We had another editor who mass-produced bios for non-notable St Peter's College alumni and that was a different editor to this article's creator (or any of their socks). We should go through the contributions and PROD other bios, too. Schwede 66 17:35, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% convinced the "other editor" is not a sock, it's too much of a coincidence that there are 2 different St Peter's College promoters with the second account starting shortly after the first was blocked. I agree that there are bound to be many more articles of similar non-notability to this one created by both accounts. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 10:06, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Schwede66, I do believe you may have erred here. Rick570 created a lot of St Peter's cruft articles that were deleted here and went on to sock with Dome1000, Jam6700, Emendment and Yelsorc. If there is another could you please enlighten us as to who so we can check their contributions. Thanks. duffbeerforme (talk) 06:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The only non press release is single about how a politician gave a mate a high paid job over the recommended candidate. Not enough for a BLP. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:02, 21 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 Draftify‎. with a side warning that if you re-create this again, Manvith Manu, you will be sanctioned for disruptive editing. The prior draft with the AfC history is now at Draft:Varthur Santhosh (old draft). Star Mississippi 14:48, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Varthur Santhosh

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

This page has been speedied and recreated several times. There is a claim in the article to redirect to Bigg Boss Kannada (season 10) which stops me from deleting it per WP:A7 / WP:G11, but I think a discussion is warranted. If the article is deleted, I recommend salting to avoid re-creation (which would then be able to be done simply using WP:G4 anyway). Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:19, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why you are deleting those information Manvith Manu (talk) 11:39, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The biographies of living persons policy is long-standing. Effectively, you cannot write about living people without immediately giving high-quality sources of where you got the information from. Without this, it is far too easy to accidentally libel someone without realising, so it is prohibited by policy. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:43, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify by un-redirecting Draft:Varthur Santhosh and deleting mainspace copy and paste move Unsourced BLP with tendentious bypass of AfC by disruptive editor. I don't know how to !vote in this scenario. The draft has the meaningful history including the AfC decline, while the mainspace page has nothing. Uhai (talk) 11:41, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you gather information from source about this person and give information about him

People should know about such good personality Manvith Manu (talk) 11:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I answered this on your talk page already. Uhai (talk) 11:47, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But I am requesting to create page about Varthur Santhosh Manvith Manu (talk) 11:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your request means very little without what is required to make an article. Draftifying it will give you the opportunity to bring it into compliance. Failure to do so will mean it will be deleted. Repeated attempts to create an article without the required sourcing and notability will likely cause you to be blocked from editing here entirely. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Inexperienced doesn't realize that BLP articles need to be at a certain quality before they can be in main article space. Draftify this so as to give them time to work on it. UtherSRG (talk) 11:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ineligible for draftification as the draft with history, including AfC decline, already exists at Draft:Varthur Santhosh (now converted to a redirect) and creator pasted the contents over the redirect in the mainspace created by previous draftification. Uhai (talk) 12:04, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Community decision (aka AFD) can overrule user objection of draftification, and given the WP:CIR issues here, this is fully acceptable. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:24, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: Not an A7 case. The individual was caught up in a controversy and made headlines after being arrested by the forest department for supposedly wearing a tiger claw pendant during a reality show, where he was a contestant. The article is currently unsourced and should be moved to draft to provide the author with the necessary time and space to improve it. Some sources i came across The Times of India, LiveMint, Times Of India, The Hindu, and DNA.AmusingWeasel (talk) 12:35, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even with the sources above, coverage is trivial; most have more space for photos than actual text in the article. He was on a TV show and wound up in trouble with the law is about what they all show, there really isn't much extra added. Oaktree b (talk) 14:01, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:54, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per above. Not outright non-notable. Capitals00 (talk) 05:20, 16 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. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Otto Spoerri

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

Otto Spoerri is not notable. Almost 100% of the Google results for him are of his obituary. There is only one Google result from before his death, a passing mention in a 1999 Entertainment Weekly article. There have been only three passing mentions of him (1, 2, 3) in reliable sources since his death per Google. There is absolutely no depth to any of this "coverage," if it can be called that. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Film, and Entertainment. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:39, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:51, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Who said obituaries did not count??? Substantial coverage in Los Angeles Times, The Denver Post, The Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The San Diego Union-Tribune, Variety (magazine).....and that’s only a one-click list.... Please....-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:25, 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!} 20:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's not the first time I've seen complaints about obituaries, but in my opinion there is nothing wrong with them (at least in the context of notability). Especially when it's a RS. Suitskvarts (talk) 14:04, 27 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:29, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Jilka

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the general and politician-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:56, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, United States of America, and Kansas. UtherSRG (talk) 14:56, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Mayor of Salinas wouldn't be notable without a ton of RS, which there isn't, beyond routine reporting of stuff going on in town where the mayor was involved. Congressional candidate isn't notable. Delete for not meeting notability requirements. Oaktree b (talk) 21:33, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Salina KS is nowhere close to large enough that its mayors would get an automatic presumption of notability just for existing as mayors — the notability test for a mayor isn't passed just by minimally verifying that he exists, and requires writing and sourcing substantial content about his political impact: specific things he did, specific projects he spearheaded, specific effects his mayoralty had on the development of the city, and on and so forth. But there's nothing like that here, and not nearly enough sourcing to claim that he would pass WP:GNG instead of having to meet the requirements of WP:NPOL #2. Bearcat (talk) 18:16, 22 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Hinrich Hussmann

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the general and artist-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:47, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, and Germany. UtherSRG (talk) 14:47, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; and expand with the German WP article for example, as a start. His notability and legacy are discussed by reliable sources quoted there. Does meet WP:NARTIST as sources show: noted as a Symbolist animalier sculptor, see: this,or this to verify that assertion with some English sources available online....-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:03, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Mushy Yank's research. Randy Kryn (talk) 08:49, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have added some new citations to the article, specifically Benezit Dictionary of Artists and RKD Research. This artist's career spanned two world wars. I took a look at the German WP article. It is not well cited. The citations to the web are all 404 or dead. I do not have access to the print articles and books cited. I can't bring anything over from the German version. The most interesting fact from that article (uncited) is that Hussmann exhibited at the Große Deutsche Kunstausstellung and was a member of the Reichskammer der Bildenden Künste (Reich Chamber of Visual Art). After looking into this for awhile, I still cannot figure out if the artist was an important animalier sculptor. I also don't understand the importance to history of the artist joining Reichskammer der Bildenden Künste. Does this affect his place in history (has he been cancelled)? Are his porcelain figures collectible or is it just auctioneer hype? I hope someone with more understanding of the subject chimes in. I lean towards Keep with the new citations and the coverage in Wiki Commons.--WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep The source Mushy Yank pointed to, "The Animaliers: A Collector's Guide to the Animal Sculptors of the 19th & 20th Centuries" by James A Mackay from Jan 1, 1973 just says "Little is known of Albert Hinrich-Hussmann, beyond the bare facts of his birth in 1874 and that he exhibited three works in Berlin in 1909, but he sculpted a Young Stag which turned up at the sale-rooms in 1970." That type of brief mention isn't the best thing to base an encyclopedia article on, but an artist being written about in a book published in another country 60 years after an exhibition and 30 years after their death is far better coverage than most of the "contemporary artists" with Wikipedia articles who are covered only by their own website and maybe some random local news. Best of luck to those working on expanding the article and I'll also see if I can find anything else to expand the article with. Elspea756 (talk) 17:39, 19 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!} 23:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Walter B. Hargreaves

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the general and music bio specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, United Kingdom, and Scotland. UtherSRG (talk) 14:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It’s hard to see how this article has survived for so long after being already flagged for notability. Does not meet WP:GNG. Go4thProsper (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion due to previously-declined prod.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep at least tentatively. A Google book search brings up multiple refs but unfortunately they are all snippets. They do demonstrate sustained coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. Whether or not they are in depth I can’t say but given the number I think we should err on the side of caution. Mccapra (talk) 00:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mccapra: If they are all snippets, then they do not satisfy WP:SIGCOV and, therefore, fails WP:GNG and should be deleted. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the context of Google books, "snippets" refers to the limited amount of material that Google displays for many copyrighted works, not to the significance of the material in total, which can only be definitely assessed with access to the complete work. Jfire (talk) 14:24, 7 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, Daniel (talk) 12:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Here is a full-page newspaper profile. The Modern Brass Band has coverage of him and says that a "detailed biography" is available in Sounding Brass, October 1976, pp. 83–85. Jfire (talk) 17:10, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Better link for Modern Brass Band: [31]. In total this book has at least three pages of content focusing on his life and accomplishments as a conductor, and his entry in the book's index cites 20 pages. This is unambiguously significant coverage. Jfire (talk) 14:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - does not meet notability guidelines Coldupnorth (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of the relable sources coverage identified by Jfire in this discussion such as The Manchester Evening News piece, and reliable book sources such as Modern Brass Band and the Sounding Brass source so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:56, 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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 03:16, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Habeck

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the general and actor-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:40, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Germany. UtherSRG (talk) 14:40, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; and rather expand with the German Wikipedia page, whose filmo as a start, for example, allows to verify he does meet WP:NACTOR for his multiple significant roles in notable films/series.I am not saying his notability comes from having other WP pages but from some of his numerous roles, some being significant. Which roles? for example, in international productions, Feppo in Lexx and Berengar in the Name of the Rose. But also lead roles in Robert Sigl's School's Out, and Der Templer, to name just a few. Coverage exists (or here for example. Also notable as voice actor. FWIW, willing to add those sources and expand the page when I have more time.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:45, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update. I started improving the page. See for yourself.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
....it’s in the page but he received a Grimme-Preis......-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:24, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:04, 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) 22:47, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notability has been established via the improvements Mushy Yank has made. Jfire (talk) 00:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, is now acceptable. Geschichte (talk) 19:27, 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. Daniel (talk) 22:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Friedrich Weber (veterinarian)

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

unsourced biography. not much found in a quick preliminary search, except for mentions of his name. ltb d l (talk) 10:39, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, and Germany. ltb d l (talk) 10:39, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Being a participant in the Munich putsch might be enough to make him notable. This is not a BLP case, so that the lack of references is not fatal. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:14, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The German article on Weber is much more in-depth and has additional sources. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sufficient sourcing to meet WP:GNG on German Wikipedia. Leading conspirator in the Munich Putsch, SS-Gruppenführer, Reich veterinary chief and leader of a major Freikorps. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: A few paragraphs in Animals in the Third Reich: Pets, Scapegoats, and the Holocaust by Boria Sax seem to indicate that Weber, as the "president of the newly formed Chamber of Veterinarians, which combined all German veterinarians into a monolithic bureaucracy", personally led the removal of Jews and dissenters from the veterinary practice and eliminated kosher slaughter (exsanguination). Curbon7 (talk) 17:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Weak keep, there are some discussions in books [32] and [33]. Oaktree b (talk) 14:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The Fr wiki article is translated from the German wiki article and they have two extensive sources from period books. I think it's good. Oaktree b (talk) 14:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Unsourced here, but extensively sourced in the French and German Wikipedias relating to such page. Their page talks about how he played a key role in the Nazi leadership. HarukaAmaranth ^春 _香 03:43, 23 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. No prejudice against speedy renomination per low participation. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:35, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Humane Sagar

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not pass the criteria of notability as a musician. Has not received any award as an artist by national or state government. No references and thumbnail articles Md Joni Hossain (talk) 04:38, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Md Joni Hossain (talk) 04:38, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Television, and Odisha. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:33, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment rather than no references there are 55 already in the article. Those with significant coverage include this, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting so we can hear from more editors about this article subject.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:32, 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!} 07:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Receiving an award from a national or state government is not a prerequisite for an article's general notability. Coverage in reliable sources is the measure of notability for Wikipedia. At a minimum, there are multiple (at least two; a more familiar editor might argue more) sources of non-trivial coverage establishing the article topic as a subject. P-Makoto (she/her) (talk) 01:09, 30 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. There is clear consensus here that a standalone page is not viable. A merger has been proposed, but doesn't have consensus, and two targets have been suggested, one of which doesn't exist at the moment. So I'm going to delete this for now, in the understanding that if a list article is created, or consensus is reached to expand a different page with this information, we can redirect this title: also, that I will gladly provide a draftspace copy for anyone who wants to develop this toward a merger. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Murad Abu Murad

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

There is no WP:SIGCOV of this individual in multiple sources that is required under the GNG guideline. VR _talk 02:56, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. VR _talk 02:56, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Palestine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:20, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've added more news sources, there's significant coverage stating his involvement in the October attacks, as well as numerous articles noting his death. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 14:52, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You added this Jerusalem Post article that supposedly gives him WP:SIGCOV. All this article says about Abu Murad is "IDF personnel eliminated Murad Abu Murad, the head of Hamas's Air Force, in Gaza City on Friday, Hebrew media reported. Murad largely took part in directing terrorists in the murderous attack last Saturday. Murad's death came as the IDF attacked Hamas's operational headquarters in the region." That's it. Nothing more. How's that SIGCOV?VR _talk 05:33, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

to me that sounds somewhat notable, at least worth merging into something or having as a list. Irtapil (talk) 14:39, 7 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!} 04:25, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Sources are about the event, and contain very little information beyond this, simply stating they were involved in the terrorist attack/org. The event itself obviously happened, there are sources for the event, but again they contain very little information and I don't think they amount to WP:SIGCOV.

Ping me if someone makes a strong case with sources for converting this into an event article. I strongly considered this, it would provide a good redirect target for the current title. The exact name for the event should be determined by reliable sources. My issue here is finding WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject (the event) directly and indepth, just because it happened doesn't make it notable. No objection to a consensus redirect. // Timothy :: talk 07:37, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TimothyBlue: I think we should start a list article, there are a lot of cases like this, where there's a notable amount of news coverage, but not enough information to be a whole page (see below). Start with a big list that includes everything, then split off if it gets too big. But, journalists already have their own page and I'm not sure how to frame it for that?

Irtapil (talk) 18:03, 7 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!} 06:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a BIO1E. Also little known about him because lacking SIGCOV. Not mentioned anywhere else so should not be redirected. Not ruling out a merge, yet it should be noted that organically nobody deemed Abu Murad important enough to be included in a more comprehensive article and there are many of these. So don't force it. gidonb (talk) 04:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades#Leaders killed by Israel or other causes as an WP:ATD. Readers might be searching for the name, and there is at least potentially some information we could give them (meaning there is enough sources for expanding the target with content about this subject, even if no one has done so yet). Seems like a typical situation where we'd have a redirect. Levivich (talk) 19:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Murad is not mentioned at the target so not a valid option. gidonb (talk) 14:08, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares, easily fixed. Levivich (talk) 14:51, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure but that fix isn't a redirect. 15:38, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Ok I changed my vote from "redirect" to "merge and redirect." Easy. Levivich (talk) 15:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Much better! gidonb (talk) 16:24, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the target? Irtapil (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's right there! Including the section at target! gidonb (talk) 19:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to see if there is more support for a Merge or if a straight Delete is preferable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:07, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete of course. A stub with no potential to expansion, no notability. Nothing to merge there. Hamas has thousands of killed members and we have a NOTAMEMORIAL to not list them all. Only the ones who were notable. With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 17:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oleg Yunakov: Not all, but this guy got news coverage in at least 3 countries, Israel, India, and Germany.

Actually, that combination makes thus article weird, most of this topic have too many USA and UK sources, but this page has none? Possibly there is a another article about him with a different spelling of his name?

Irtapil (talk) 14:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also @Oleg Yunakov: I'm tentatively skeptical of "Hamas has thousands of killed members". As far as I can tell, that figure includes ALL males over 15 years old who've been killed in Gaza? when the number of militants was previously estimated as just 40,000 out of the half million men in Gaza, and the war has kilted thousands of adult female civilians.

The only way I see that adding up is if nearly all of the missing are dead combatants that Hamas are refusing to report, which is fairly plausible (under reporting combatant casualties is very common, and would be a lot easier than the over reporting of civilians they keep being accused of), but that's pure speculation. So currently I'm filing "thousands of dead Hamas militants" as "one side said", the same category as the number of Israeli tanks Al-Qassam claim to have destroyed?

But there is a slight bias towards adult males in the deaths so it could be one or two thousand, just not quite as many thousand as the IDF claim.

Irtapil (talk) 14:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you however an individual who receives only temporary news coverage doesn't meet the BIO1E guidelines. For instance, not every victim of the October 7 mass murder committed by Hamas has a dedicated article, despite multiple news coverages for each. I have done research when I wrote over 100 articles on this topic in ruwiki (including all major October 7 events such as all but one here, articles on Hamas members, settlements, victims and etc.). To warrant an article, sustained interest over a longer period and potential analytics, along with adherence to notability criteria is necessary.

I'm not referring to all males over 15 and 40K, but specifically focusing on the 8K killed Hamas members. With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 14:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oleg Yunakov

I know exactly what your are referring to. I was saying I don't believe the "one side says" unless there's some other evidence (you seem to have my even read to the end of the headline, "says IDF spokesman"?) There is no independent source verifying tower 8,000 dead people exist, unless you count almost every dead man and dead teenage boy in Gaza. So,

The IDF just made up the number
The IDF are counting dead civilians as militants (seems most likely, the USA has often counted every adult male as a combatants, "military aged males", people write whole PhD theses on that)
The Hamas government in Gaza are hiding thousands of the deaths of combatants (quite common, Ukraine and Russia are both hiding the numbers)

18:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC) Irtapil (talk) 18:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not disagreeing with you and I do not think that anyone would disagree that those numbers can only be used with an attribution. But I am missing the point regarding how such number is related to the notability of Murad Abu Murad? IMHO it's unrelated. Regarding the potential list of little stubs it has to comply with PEOPLELIST. If the guy has another name you are welcome to find it and prove notability. Otherwise we can say that anyone can have other name with potential notability. With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oleg Yunakov And as I was saying below, I thin best solution is to make a list page complying all these little stubs. But, "Abu" is very common in militant pseudonyms, e.g. the spokesmen, so this guy possibly has another name…

18:40, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Second choice, Keep or merge with an existing page, but I would prefer…
Start a list page - There will probably be a lot of these little articles?

To begin with I would include all factions and Hezbollah (not just Hamas). We can split it if it gets too long. Some entries can refer to a {{main}} page, but most probably won't. But what do we call it? And should we include notabe civilians?

📝 "List of Palestinian and allied militants killed in the 2023-2024 Israel-Hamas war"

But that is too long?

📝 "Palestinian and allied militants killed in the 2023-2024 war"

Which war is probably implied

📝 "Alleged militants killed in the 2023-2024 Israel-Hamas war"

Some (e.g. Ali Bazi) seem to be officially unconfirmed and recently dead people probably warrant similar caution to WP:BLP? Possibly we could just make it comprehensive?

📝 "List of notable deaths in the 2023-2024 war"

That would include journalists and any other civilians whose deaths got substantial news coverage?
But the 1,139 deaths on the Israeli side at the beginning probably belong on a different list, the level of detail about them could easily fill an entire wiki page?

📝 "Notable non-Israeli casualties in the 2023-2024 war"

But I have never seen "notable" in an article title before, is there a better way to say that?
The 3 hostages who got shot seem like they belong in that list, but "kilted by Israel" is obviously going to cause problems. Possibly it could just be 8 October onwards? But the IDF soldiers seem like they belong elsewhere?

Irtapil (talk) 13:41, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea of either having a list of casualties for the war in general, or split lists for Israeli/Palestinian sides, although the list of 'Notable' people may not be long enough for split articles. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, WP:BIO1E applies. Probably worth making a list page. Stifle (talk) 09:20, 12 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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vipul Dhanaker

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

Non-notable Musician. — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 18:12, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, India, and Delhi. Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 18:12, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Both references in the article, The Hindustan Times and Times Now News, are non-independent as they're mere interviews. Otherwise, no other sources found that are WP:NBASIC nor WP:MUSICBIO-worthy, both in English or Hindi languages. ~ Tails Wx 19:14, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It fails to satisfy WP:GNG since the references solely consist of interviews, and no sources aligning with the criteria of WP:MUSICBIO have been found. Dcotos (talk) 22:02, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:14, 18 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) 03:09, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alekh Kumar Parida

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

Not yet meet WP:FILMMAKER or WP:MUSICBIO. Macbeejack ☎ 06:25, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Music, and India. Macbeejack ☎ 06:25, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per above, not notable enough. killer bee  07:57, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Odisha. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:51, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Alekh is a notable singer. The news shows this very clearly. Even the coalition of two more people with Alekh is covered by the news channels. Historical Heritages of Bihar (talk) 06:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Subject of the article genuinely passes the WP:GNG notability guidelines, as far he has many news articles in Hindi and in English also. (Koilwaar1 (talk) 13:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC))[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input would be helpful
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No policy but I thought I'd mention that today I've been reviewing lots of newly created articles about people involved in music or film who have no real credits to their name. This was another article almost identical to others I've come across, created by Historical Heritages of Bihar and others by Koilwaar1. (like Sean David Lowe). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- I found these Below, should pass WP:BASIC [34], [35], [36] Wasilatlovekesy (talk) 06:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To review Wasilatlovekesy's proposal of sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:43, 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 keep‎. Consensus is that the necessary sources could be added from the Italian version. clpo13_(talk) 19:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheikh Tidiane Gaye

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the general and author-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:53, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Senegal, and Italy. UtherSRG (talk) 18:53, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, there aren't many secondary sources available in the English language, Gaye's quoted opinion does crop up a few times though. This might be expected as Gaye writes in the Italian language. His page on the Italian Wikipedia it:Cheikh Tidiane Gaye appears to have more sources. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 00:32, 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!} 23:11, 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!} 21:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the sourcing in it.wiki demonstrates notability. Mccapra (talk) 08:29, 27 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) 19:11, 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. I see a consensus to Keep this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua P. Kolar

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG as a judicial nominee due to a lack of independent, significant coverage. Originally sent this back to a draft after it was originally created but someone else decided to move it back to mainspace so here we are again. Let'srun (talk) 15:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, United States of America, and Indiana. Let'srun (talk) 15:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I vote keep. I am someone who has an interest in the legal system and has an interest in politics. These judicial nominees receive a lot of press and news coverage and I the first place I turn to read up or refresh my memory about the nominees is Wikipedia. As a user, it is incredibly frustrating to not have these pages available. I don't understand why any contestant on a reality tv show can get a wikipedia page but a person nominated to our highest courts (Fed III) has to jump through a ton of hoops. What exactly is the harm of keeping the page. If for some reason, he doesn't get confirmed, delete it then. Cazer78 (talk) 23:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, as Kolar has been a magistrate judge for the Northern District of Indiana since 2019. He also serves as a lieutenant commander in the U.S. navy reserve.

I generally agree judicial nominees don't meet notability, as merely being a nominee is insufficient, but there are cases where judicial nominees are already judges on lower courts (or magistrate judges) including this one. They can also have similar notability due to military leadership or prior legal work that has received independent coverage. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 15:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Might you point me to the notability guideline that says a magistrate judge or lieutenant commander in the U.S. navy reserve is notable? Kolar has never been a judge on a statewide court, so WP:JUDGE does not apply. Let'srun (talk) 16:59, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:USJUDGE: "Magistrate judges and bankruptcy judges are appointed by the court of the district in which they sit. Such judges are not inherently notable, but holding such a position is evidence of notability that can be established by other strong indicia of notability." I believe Kolar's military service along with being an incumbent magistrate judge indicates his notability.

US Navy Records Indicating Kolar was a lieutenant commander:

[37]https://www.navy.mil/Resources/ALNAVs/Message/Article/2235726/fy-19-navy-reserve-lieutenant-commander-line-selections/ JohnAdams1800 (talk) 17:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:USCJN is an essay, not a notability guideline. Let'srun (talk) 17:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:USJUDGE. Kolar holds a "sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office". Jaireeodell (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm just trying to figure out the logic here. This article gets created as a draft in September and bounced around between draft and main. And then this month, gets nominated as an AfC and ultimately approved and reviewed/patrolled by a different editor. And then within three hours of being moved to main (again) today gets nominated for AfD? I need someone to explain to me the standard practice to follow if and when a draft gets moved and patrolled, but still apparently doesn't meet WP:GNG per the current AfD discussion. Snickers2686 (talk) 17:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He meets WP:JUDGE. It would be incorrect to interpret federal judicial service in a state that subdivides its federal courts (like in Indiana) any differently from those states that don't (such as New Jersey, for example.) I don't know why a couple of people keep tying themselves in knots over this. Valadius (talk) 22:04, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The states don't divide (or not divide) their federal courts. Congress does that. Irrespective of whether there is such a division, judicial service as a magistrate judge (basically a glorified assistant to an Article III federal judge) does not constitute "state/province–wide office" any more than does service as a bailiff or law clerk to an Article III judge. BD2412 T 22:59, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstand the role of a magistrate judge. Magistrates frequently rule on substantive issues. Their rulings are precedent is. That a district judge can overrule them is besides the point — the comparison to a clerk is inappropriate. 165.82.238.249 (talk) 22:19, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Kolar will be appointed to the 7th Circuit (any day now) or, if not, he will become the subject of a lot of consternation in the news ... right? In either case, he will be notable. I think it would be a mistake to delete this and then hope that editors will recreate it. -- Jaireeodell (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably right, but that is WP:CRYSTAL. That is why draft space exists, but some editors have to rush things. Let'srun (talk) 01:47, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep They meets WP:JUDGE. ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 03:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is absolutely no reason to take down a wikipedia page for a judicial nominee. We should be focusing on expanding Wikipedia, not contracting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.211.154.91 (talk) 07:55, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy-based input would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I would be willing to argue that this article might not be notable for being a magistrate judge. But he's about to become a circuit judge and that clearly passes WP:JUDGE. Also he has enough coverage to pass WP:GNG at this point so it's all moot anyway. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 10:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify until confirmation He does not meet notability requirements for a judge until confirmed, but deleting while his confirmation is pending is probably counterproductive. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 20:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The guidelines at WP:JUDGE specifies that it applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them so even he is not assuming the position yet, I think he has been "elected" as they have voted him in as well. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not how it works. Kolar has never been elected as a judge, he was appointed to fill a judicial vacancy by President Biden but has yet to be confirmed (and as such is WP:CRYSTAL to assume he will be confirmed). Let'srun (talk) 05:29, 26 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. ✗plicit 00:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kyran Lacy

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

Fails YOUNGATH. No non-routine coverage. Fermiboson (talk) 08:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Rugby union, and Hong Kong. Fermiboson (talk) 08:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG. No suitable redirect either at this stage. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:56, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Author contests deletion on talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Tried to find sources in Google, but couldn't, fails WP:SIGCOV. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:24, 19 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. There is just about a consensus below to delete, disregarding rationales that don't have a solid basis in policy. WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE provides that a rough consensus allows an administrator to close as delete. Per FormalDude, the key argument here (regarding notability) hasn't been answered. Right path forward here is deleting the article per this rough consensus. Daniel (talk) 22:16, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Guleria

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

1) I am not in a position to update and keep tab on this page. 2) I found the defamatory news are linked to this page without even remotely any substance. 3) I do not want to be associated with defamation case or legal complication.

I hope above my statement is accepted and delete this page. Rejimonck (talk) 07:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Rejimonck (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]

(Filed by User:FormalDude on nominator's behalf. Request for deletion received via VRTS ticket # 2023121110002296.)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Medicine, and Himachal Pradesh. ––FormalDude (talk) 07:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and speedy close Notable subject. Self-request for the sake of mere deletion are considered frivolous. killer bee  08:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @K6bee9: To be fair, a !vote that just states WP:ITSNOTABLE is also frivolous. It would be helpful if you could explain why the subject is notable. ––FormalDude (talk) 10:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm not sure what's defamatory about this, he won an award? Doesn't sound all that bad. Rest is basically where he works. Oaktree b (talk) 14:52, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Oaktree b: What the nom is referring to is this recently removed content. ––FormalDude (talk) 04:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Understood, I still don't think that adds much for notability. Perhaps if found guilty, it's all accusations at this point. What we have now is a doctor, winning awards of dubious notability. Oaktree b (talk) 21:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep clearly notable Worldiswide (talk) 05:06, 12 December 2023 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet)[reply]
Delete: Award might be notable, but what we have are trivial mentions of the individual; I can't find anything beyond what's given here. If the gentleman was involved (or not) in unsavoury operations at the hospital, well that doesn't add to notability unless proven guilty. That could be something, but what we have now is a doctor that won an award. That's fine but without sourcing we can't have an article. Oaktree b (talk) 14:13, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All that I made request.

Since am the one who created the page, I hold it important, to delete it.

I hope that any author have rights will be respected foremost.

I am not into debate on rest of the issues at this stage. Rejimonck (talk) 05:47, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Can't seem to find any WP:SIGCOV, doesn't look like it meets WP:NBIO. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 17:41, 18 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} 20:45, 18 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 Miss Tennessee#Winners. Daniel (talk) 12:27, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chandler Lawson

(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 sustained significant sources. Let'srun (talk) 02:26, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Beauty pageants, and Tennessee. Let'srun (talk) 02:26, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:47, 10 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!} 01:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Miss Tennessee#Winners as an alternative to deletion. The subject has not received sustained coverage and the subject is also only notable for one event. ~ Tails Wx 02:40, 17 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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:39, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kelsey Griswold

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

Subject does not meet the WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR due to a lack of substantial and sustained coverage. Let'srun (talk) 23:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Beauty pageants, and Oklahoma. Let'srun (talk) 23:18, 9 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!} 23:24, 16 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:36, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Powell (sportscaster)

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

I don't think Georgia Association of Broadcasters Hall of Fame is enough for N:BIO and am unable to find anything else of depth to establish notability for this broadcaster. With long tenures with the Brewers and Braves, I don't think there's an obvious redirect. Star Mississippi 23:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Baseball, Georgia (U.S. state), and Wisconsin. Star Mississippi 23:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. mlb.com has a decent bio of him[38] and Bleacher Report gave him a paragraph as Bob Uecker's departing longtime broadcasting partner.[39] He might also have been a Frick Award nominee, if this source can be believed. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:56, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Current article quality is lacking, but I found sources for notability.[40][41][42][43][44] I presume more can be found. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To analyse sources presented.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 17:04, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I've reviewed the sources presented above and they seem sufficient in affirming the subject's notability. Furthermore, searches for "Jim Powell Brewers" and "Jim Powell Braves" on Google Books yield results. Most notably, chapter 30 of this book is titled "Jim Powell and Chip Caray at Truist Park"; the chapter is about 10 pages long featuring extensive interviews and coverage of Powell. Left guide (talk) 21:35, 15 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 Survivor: Blood vs. Water. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tyson Apostol

AfDs for this article:

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

I can't help wonder whether Men's Health is enough to verify his notability, especially as a Survivor returnee. Indeed, we can't be sure whether his Tocantins debut and HvV return suffice, and some other returnees turn out to be notable for only their own winning seasons, especially debut ones. Furthermore, I can't be sure whether his supposed "notability" (and possibly everything else about him) comply with the WP:BLP policy, and I don't mean WP:BLP1E alone. Same goes for how he's been eliminated in Survivor, his poker winnings, and his finalist status in The Challenge.

Honestly, I think the article must be preferably redirected to Survivor: Blood vs. Water, but I don't mind it being alternately redirected to the list of Survivor (American TV series) contestants. Furthermore, his activities outside Survivor, like poker, might not save this article from being redirected(... or deleted if the consensus were to favor the latter more than the former options.) George Ho (talk) 05:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, and Utah. George Ho (talk) 05:14, 8 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!} 04:32, 15 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!} 04:30, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nom's comment – Just in case, if no one opposes, then I am okay with the whole article by default deleted or redirected (preferably to Survivor: Blood vs. Water) per WP:BIODELETE. I won't be comfortable with the article being kept by default, but I won't challenge the decision made if that's decided. --George Ho (talk) 04:16, 23 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. ✗plicit 23:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

David Boulton

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

WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. I don't see any independent sources with any significant depth. Daask (talk) 21:51, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Daask (talk) 21:51, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ZettaComposer: Courtesy ping as contributor to this article. Daask (talk) 21:54, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:59, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing stated in this brief summary of me and my work that is untrue or misleading. I am not an actor. I am not a filmmaker, though I did produce and direct the Children of the Code documentary. I have no idea why anyone would want to delete this page? 2600:1700:9831:60B0:19D6:FBD8:3050:AF4B (talk) 23:18, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's sourced to your biography, so if anything is incorrect, I'd start there first. It's being looked at for deletion as we only have primary sources. Oaktree b (talk) 23:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:59, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing stated in this brief summary of me and my work that is untrue or misleading. I am not an actor. I am not a filmmaker, though I did produce and direct the Children of the Code documentary. I have no idea why anyone would want to delete this page? 2600:1700:9831:60B0:19D6:FBD8:3050:AF4B (talk) 23:19, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping @Daask:. IIRC I just passed through and gave it a quick cleanup while fixing underlinked tags. If there are no other independent sources to enhance the article and make it less self-promotional then I Support deletion. ZettaComposer (talk) 15:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I am new to Wiki page procedures, may I request an extension of time to compile more independent resources. I am familiar with David Boulton and his work and feel confident we can update the page. David Boulton is currently ill with Covid and my correspondence with him is delayed. Is there a "specific" objection to any statements on the page or just a general lack of "independent sources with any significant depth" Kevin Kevin Manley (talk) 18:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vote to KEEP. Not sure any objections are clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevin Manley (talk • contribs) 14:29, 9 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!} 22:47, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Several hits on the name that I find, none that seem to be about this individual however. We only have primary sourcing or non-RS now in the article, so not much for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:28, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: before search does not produce positive result to demonstrate notability. Search result brought up several different things not related to the information about the subject here. Metroick (talk) 05:46, 15 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 Aimee Semple McPherson. No prejudice against merging into the main article as appropriate, although there are concerns some of the material may be non-neutral and/or unencyclopedic. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:20, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Faith healing ministry of Aimee Semple McPherson

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

Unnecessary content fork, largely duplicating the already-existing Aimee Semple McPherson without really offering a clear reason why her work would be a standalone topic separately from her life. Bearcat (talk) 21:03, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 21:03, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to main per nom. There is no indication this is a notable subject apart from the main article. The tone and content is unencyclopedic. If someone wants to volunteer to filter out the problems and Merge properly sourced material that meets NPOV, no objection. // Timothy :: talk 21:13, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Aimee Semple McPherson per nom. This article was created in 2015 by the RagesossBot of User:MaggieHood19 and her students, as a Wikistudent project - more than a decade after the original article already existed. There really is no reason to keep this. — Maile (talk) 23:28, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Spirituality. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:32, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if redirect then the material would be migrated back into the main article lengthening it again (which is why it was removed to its own article in May 2015)

The faith healing section was originally part of the main article but was lengthy and detailed enough for its own article as it was adding substantially to the main article which was to be condensed. This occurred in May 9 2015 by MaggieHood19

Sources are already well referenced, if there is an issue with "encyclopedic" tone, some specifics in this area to the problem sentences etc would be useful as objections currently too vague to be actionable by myself at least

In any instance, I plan to work on the article as needed, for example a neglected area is the opposition against McPherson in this area from theological view of Cessationism is the view that the “miracle gifts” of tongues and healing have ceased, at the end of the end of the apostolic age.

Granted more in this area could be done to explore the Cessationism aspect in the article and likely the only significant viewpoint missing since already there is the American Medical Association in San Francisco, Pastor Charles S. Price , (skeptic minister who came to believe after he saw) atheist, Charles Chaplin (skilled hypnotism and the power she commanded over the crowds); P.H. Welshimer of First Christian Church (hypnotism and "mesmeric power") and others in the Views on McPherson’s work section and elsewhere. SteamWiki (talk) 00:22, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Aimee Semple McPherson: As per the nomination. Ratnahastin (talk) 14:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but revise. If incorporated back into Aimee Semple McPherson there are a few references here that are different and should be kept. The main article already has 204 references (although possibly some of those can be cut down IMO). Some of this material could be moved to Faith healing which currently only says "During the 1920s and 1930s, Aimee Semple McPherson was a controversial faith healer of growing popularity during the Great Depression." although that article also isn't designed to go into details about individual faith healers. If this article is kept it needs revision.johnmark†:Talk(talk to me) 00:48, 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!} 22:48, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ (duplicate !vote struck Daniel (talk) 03:28, 29 December 2023 (UTC)) I intend on working on the article, especially past the "holidays;" December a good month for editors to work on articles demanding attention buried as they can be with all the responsibilities of friends and family around this time of year LoL.[reply]

As before the "Cessationism" view needs to be included, this I already have text and a source from a famous minister of the time, it has to be properly edited before it can be added to the article.

Also, among other things, more details on McPherson's first faith healing by which she learned of it she herself; (broken ankle) healed by William Durham, who brought the Azusa revival to Chicago and its link to Pentecostalism and its traditions of divine healing.

The healing, stated, by McPherson, in a testimony, was done before 12 witnesses (one a skeptic who was astonished then joined the others in praise after he saw the cast removed from the healed foot) divided the congregation. Doubters did not think the foot had ever been broken, or did not believe it had been healed (Epstein p 59).

William Durham, attended the Azusa Street revival, initiated with African American preacher William J. Seymour who had established the Azusa Street Mission in 1906. was known also for its numerous statements by people of either faith healings they saw or received.

William Durham, himself was convinced; after severe attack of rheumatic fever in 1891, he survived by praying, confirming his belief in the doctrine of divine healing.

The period skeptic of the era angle, among with mesmerism, hypnotism etc also have examples of persons who were not healed. At this time I have not located any information or interviews by skeptics investigating those who emphatically claimed they were healed such as the Romani who came to Christ because of stated healings; nevertheless I have some examples of those, given by some skeptics, who wanted healing and did not get it and shall include those in the article as well.SteamWiki (talk) 04:35, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:28, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ As stated earlier I intend on working on the article,and to this end obtained another source Charles H Barfoot wrote the book Aimee Semple McPherson and the Making of Modern Pentecostalism, 1890-1926 which has details in areas glossed over or not covered by other biographers .

SteamWiki (talk) 13:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC) (striking duplicate vote Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:26, 27 December 2023 (UTC))[reply]

Redirect to Aimee Semple McPherson: per the NPOV maintenance tag which has been up for seven years and as a WP:POVFORK article. The article is written in the POV of a faith healer and duplicates the content of Aimee Semple McPherson. बिनोद थारू (talk) 04:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Aimee Semple McPherson per nomination, non-neutral content fork. Daniel (talk) 03:31, 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 delete‎. Timothy's argument is compelling because it invokes WP:V, a core policy. The issue of notability aside, the article is entirely unsourced, and therefore unverifiable (verifiability means that references are cited in the article and support the text, not merely that they exist somewhere). Therefore, the content is worthless and the article, if the subject is notable, would need to be rewritten from scratch, citing sources. Sandstein 15:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hadji-Dawud

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

Can't find many if any reliable sources on this topic. A standard Google search turns up absolutely nothing, with all hits being either irrelevant/off-topic content, or blatantly unreliable sources like blogs, commentary, and definitions. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 01:29, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Islam, Iran, and Azerbaijan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:34, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:35, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the ru.wiki article looks massively refbombed and I can’t evaluate those sources but the equivalent articles in other languages don’t appear to lack sources. Mccapra (talk) 07:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Try "Hajji Da'ud" (or Davud) or "Da'ud Beg" or many other variations. Srnec (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you name a single source that either of those will get us? Uncle G (talk) 12:40, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - The Politics of Trade in Safavid Iran, p. 227, Cambridge University Press, 1999, ISBN 9780521641319
  - Persia in Crisis: Safavid Decline and the Fall of Isfahan, p. 223, Bloomsbury, ISBN 9781838607074
  - Baumer, History of the Caucasus, Volume 1, p. 164
  - The permutations of names like this that combine titles and/or honorifics with given names, all derived from Arabic but not from an Arabic-speaking context and that have to be transliterated into the Latin alphabet in different ways depending on the target language... makes it very difficult to do proper searches unless you know what to look for. It is unfortunate that some topic areas are plagued by bad-faith editors. Good-faith but ill-informed deletions, however, only encourage bad faith. Srnec (talk) 01:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - So why has it taken you, who did know what to look for, 3 weeks, several requests from Liz, and an outright direct prod from me to come up with anything at all? You claim to be best positioned, but you didn't put any effort in. Even now, you didn't bother to tell us whether these were books, journal articles, or something else, and make it absurdly difficult for other people when you have the information. I've had to hunt to find out what the Hell you were even citing and fill in the information above. Please stop complaining about good-faith nominations and start actually helping other editors. Otherwise you are the problem. Uncle G (talk) 13:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Whilst there appears to be a confusion over characters on naming convention from original written language, jumbling the letters and diacritics a certain way shows plenty of sources and notable coverage. Dock Mock (talk) 20:34, 7 December 2023 (UTC)(sock strike) oknazevad (talk) 02:57, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. All sourced and verifiable. --Frankie Photographer (talk) 10:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC) (sock strike Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC))[reply]
- That is an outright falsehood, given that there is not a single source citation in the entire article. Uncle G (talk) 12:40, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Despite a consensus to Keep this article, it remains unsourced and none of the discussion participants has brought any new references to this discussion. I don't see how any editor can say all sourced and verifiable without demonstrating a single citation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:59, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep But the article needs some proper sourcing. killer bee  05:22, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- We need to see some sources, K6bee9, because right now, there aren't any. Care to do a search? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Checking out ru:Хаджи-Давуд#Примечания and some of the things that it points to it does seem that this is a well-recorded historical figure, but largely only if one can access and read academic and book sources published in the Soviet Union. That comment by Frankie Photographer (talk · contribs) above, who is also responsible for edit warring over 19KiB of sourceless content in the article's edit history, is shameful for being such a blatant falsehood about sourcing. I turned up a Dutch history Hedendaagsche historie; of het vervolg van de Algemeene historie from 1767 that mentions Lesji and a Dawg Beg in 1721, and a 20th century French source that apparently mentions one "Dawud-beg, chef des Lezghiens", both agreeing with the Russian Wikipedia's Дауд-бек; so I suspect that the problem is bad editors like NapoleonTHEvictorious (talk · contribs) and Frankie Photographer (talk · contribs) dumping stuff into the article, edit warring, and falsely claiming that it is sourced, rather than this being someone who is not in the history books. Quite frankly, I think that we can do without the edit warriors who outright misrepresent the absence of sources in their edits such as Special:Diff/1188225011. Uncle G (talk) 12:40, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for further input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Still not a single source.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: right now, the Russian Wikipedia version has 139 references and the Azerbaijani Wikipedia version has 63. Left guide (talk) 01:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Left guide, can you add any of these sources that you think are reliable into the article or at least mention a few of them here? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:25, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hello Liz, unfortunately that seems unlikely, since I'm not fluent in reading either of those two languages, but I will see if I can find English sources. Left guide (talk) 02:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - Left guide, that would be helpful! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm not going through sources, because even if sources are found, this needs TNT to make room for a proper article. Since nothing in the article is sourced, the article history is has no value. The entire article could be deleted down to a title microstub simply based on a WP:V challenge. A future article shouldnt be tied to this unsourced content and a future editor shouldn't feel the need to try and source what looks to be a significant amount of OR. // Timothy :: talk 08:20, 30 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 due to a lack of participation. No prejudice on immediate renomination. Daniel (talk) 19:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Hudhayfah Al-Ansari

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

Non-notable spokesman of a notable organisation. The very few reliable sources that mention him do so only in passing; all else I could find in a WP:BEFORE search in English and Arabic is blogs and social media chatter, and it's difficult to verify whether he actually exists. His predecessor's name is a redirect to Islamic State. Wikishovel (talk) 15:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Terrorism, Islam, and Iraq. Wikishovel (talk) 15:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He has made a audio speech and i have posted blog link to its english translation by Aymenn j al-tamimi, one of best experts on Jihadism & Islamic State in particular.

We had a article Abul-Hasan al-Muhajir since he made his first speech and his personal identity remained unknown and was revealed after his death. Sam6897 (talk) 16:43, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, but I bet for Maintain: Same as Wikishovel, it need to be extended and with more reliable sources. I believe there are sources which can help us to say more than his occupation and his succession. In the case of Abul-Hasan al-Muhajir, we have a biography of him, so it makes it more notable. Tajotep (talk) 11:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All things about Abul Hasan identity emerged after his death in late, 2019. For 3 years he was mysterious unknown spokesmen but he still had a wikipedia page. Sam6897 (talk) 21:12, 12 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!} 19:08, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 12:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to clarify a speech is a primary source and is not any indication of notability. Industrial Insect (talk) 16:19, 19 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) 19:39, 26 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. Daniel (talk) 04:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Bretow

AfDs for this article:

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

Does not appear to meet WP:PRODUCER or WP:GNG. Not able to find any sort of WP:SIGCOV. The creator of this article recently created Mammoth Pictures which was co-founded by the subject and whose notability is questionable too. Hitro talk 10:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and United States of America. Hitro talk 10:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete the draft has been already declined: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alex_Bretow. BoraVoro (talk) 10:09, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:25, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I added some content and sources and reviewed existing sources. There is consistent coverage of the individual and his films, beginning with his student films being shown at Cannes two years in a row. This coverage is in both industry publications and newspapers. There are articles about him, not just film reviews, which I believe meets the requirement for sig coverage. In addition, he was selected by Forbes as an up-and-coming entrepreneur. Rublamb (talk) 14:45, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just noting that this article was created by a sockpuppet of User:Abbasshaikh124 but I think enough work has been done on it by other editors that it isn't eligible for CSD G5. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 10:44, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Please review additions made since the article's nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Can't really find any issues with article. Micheal Kaluba (talk) 16:36, 22 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 France at the 1908 Summer Olympics#Archery. Daniel (talk) 22:28, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Dauchez

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

Fails WP:SPORTSBASIC. Only source in the article is an Olympedia source which is not in-depth coverage, and does not satisfy notability guidelines. A BEFORE search doesn't show anything promising either. Tails Wx 03:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Olympics, and France. Tails Wx 03:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:15, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment it apears the person was of some notable in the early 20th century, the article exists in several languages but I do agree that more sources must be added and more that the article at its current state is poor. At its current state I think you're right. Homerethegreat (talk) 17:05, 2 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!} 07:29, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing in Newspapers.com or ProQuest. We can't assume everyone got sustained SIGCOV.

JoelleJay (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to France at the 1908 Summer Olympics#Archery per WP:ATD if no further sources can be located - that would require a proper search of French newspapers of the period, which it appears has not so far taken place. Ingratis (talk) 07:56, 12 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!} 22:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to France at the 1908 Summer Olympics#Archery as an ATD. Fails GNG and NBIO. BEFORE showed database results, nothing that would indicate there is WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 15:26, 21 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 centenarians (military commanders and soldiers). Star Mississippi 15:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Józef Kos

AfDs for this article:

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

Private soldier of the German and Polish armies. Long and worthy of respect life. But I'm not sure if meets our notability requirements. According to this article when Józef Kos died at the age of 107, he was "only" the second oldest person in the voivodeship, not to mention a country. Marcelus (talk) 22:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Poland. Marcelus (talk) 22:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of centenarians (military commanders and soldiers). Prior AfD in 2007 which I started was a snow keep but with everyone just repeatign that 'being 106 years old is sufficient to make someone notable'. Well, our standards have risen since, I am afraid, and we require significant coverage in RS. What we have instead is a bunch of obituaries in local news. No pl wiki article. The subject fails WP:NBIO. But we have a valid list he should be mentioned in and redirected there. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 01:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 10:27, 14 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. ✗plicit 00:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ihsanullah Shah Rashdi

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

A border line accept at WP:AFC with a passionate SPA creator. Not at all clear how they pass WP:GNG, apparently known for his role in the Khilafat Movement during the British Raj in Sindh, Pakistan, but the sources are not clear on what this role was, he managed a library and established the Sindh Provincial Khilafat Committee but these things are not inherently notable? Theroadislong (talk) 18:14, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Pakistan. Theroadislong (talk) 18:14, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

blocked sockpuppet

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi. I disagree with te deleting. I've added more references, including some in Urdu. I'm open to assisting with any issues and suggest using Google Translate for the non-English content to confirm. SaneFlint (talk) 09:13, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This opinion has been recorded formally lower down in the discussion. I am not striking it out. It is sufficient to draw the closer's attention to it 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:08, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I trust editors will address the confirmation or translation of reference number 1,and 6 written in Urdu. Google translate might be helpful for that. SaneFlint (talk) 22:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment declined 12 times and rejected once, before being accepted at WP:AFC. Theroadislong (talk) 19:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I have a firm personal policy of steadfast neutrality at articles I accepted at AFC. I follow the guidance that a draft must, in my view, have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. This is not quite an immediate deletion process and I await the community's view. If kept, I will be pleased. If deleted, I will correct anything I feel needs to be corrected in my reviewing. Reviewers get better when their work is sent to AfD, which allows the community to decide as opposed to a single reviewer. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:03, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contributors to this discussion will wish to note that the creating/major editor of the article is busy seeking to verify notability by use of references. I am not reviewing their work and therefore cannot comment upon it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:42, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The academic paper Contributions of Allama Syed Ihsanullah Shah Rashdi Towards Religion and Education". suggests that the subject is found notable by (some) Islamic scholars. I don't read Urdu, so I'm at a disadvantage for most of the refs, but ref 6 also suggests notability. I think the article has all sorts of problems, but notability is not one of them. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

comment A before would also have found https://umm-ul-qura.org/2021/01/13/biography-of-shaykh-muhibullah-shah-rashdi/ from which:

The father of Shaykh Muhibullah, Shaykh Ihsanullah Shah Rashdi was a great and respected scholar, even King AbdulAziz had excellent relations with him and would exchange letters with him (as mentioned by Shaykh Muhibullah in his auto biography present in “Bahrul Ulum” p 41)

Allamah Sayid Sulayman Nadwi wrote: “Sayid Ihsanullah Shah (rah) was a great scholar of Hadith and its narrators. He had a treasure in his library of rare manuscripts of Hadith, Tafsir, and narrators (Rijaal). His yearning was such that he had copists busy in copying new manuscripts from manuscripts of west and east, Egypt and Shaam, Qustantiniyah (Turkey). He (rah) was a follower of the path of the Salaf and was distinguished in knowledge and action” -Tagishsimon (talk) 03:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The quote you shared is from a self published website. Jeraxmoira (talk) 05:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst working on the article I too found the source, but felt it didn't amount to significant coverage and was written in a hagiographic tone. Theroadislong (talk) 07:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are allowed to be hagiographic. The point is that multiple sources are commenting on the subject. Jeraxmoira, meanwhile, is applying strictly western values to a Pakastani publishing company, which seems unhelpful. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if you have checked it completely. It is posted by an 'admin' and there are no sources/ references to what is written on that website apart from his son's autobiography, "as mentioned by Shaykh Muhibullah in his auto biography present in “Bahrul Ulum” p 41". Their Facebook page is linked to an individual. Jeraxmoira (talk) 13:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

blocked sockpuppet

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

the number 1 reference and number 6 reference prove these article as well. Please take a look thank you so much SaneFlint (talk) 13:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I disagree with the deletion. I've added more references, including some in Urdu. I'm open to assisting with any issues and suggest using Google Translate for the non-English content to confirm.

I'm really trying hard to expend the great Wikipedia community to our region more closely thank you SaneFlint (talk) 11:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above should be interpreted as an opinion to Keep the article. The editor lacks experience with our processes. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's collaborate to ensure clarity and find a resolution that works for all. SaneFlint (talk) 15:06, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

comment: ~~I prefer not to vote as I've been extensively involved in this article, but~~ I'd like to raise some points for other editors to consider. Here is my source assessment.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://archive.org/details/6.syedAhsan	Journal entry			✔ Yes
https://archive.org/details/SufiSaintsAndStatePowerThePirsOfSind18431947BySarahAnsari		~~WP:RAJ British author and publisher~~		✘ No
https://www.aleeqaz.org/index.php/aleeqaz/article/view/140			Has no mention of BDP	✘ No
https://archive.org/details/YaadERaftaganByShaykhSyedSulaimanNadvir.a/page/n107/mode/2up			?	? Unknown
https://www.salafiri.com/biography-shaikh-muhibullah-shah-ar-rashidi-as-sindhi-1415h/		It looks like it has been copied from a library entry of an essay with no references backing the claims. [45]		✘ No
https://archive.org/details/MajallahBahrulUloomMuhaddisUlAsarNoMuhibullahShahRashdi_201502/page/n113/mode/2up			Not about BDP	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

The article mentions that the BDP is notable for its connection to the Khilafat Movement, but I couldn't find any information on the Khilafat Movement Wikipedia page or in the articles linked to it.
Lead mentions that he is an Islamic scholar but a WP:BEFORE on Google Books, scholar, JSTOR and newspaper returns with 0 results almost and I am not able to find primary sources of his works as well.

At this point [46] (not the assessment table above), Sources 1,2 and 4 are the same. 3 is unreliable per WP:RAJ and has no sigcov. 5 Only mentions BDP's father. 6 passes if someone can verify it. 8 is about BDP's son and not BDP themselves. Jeraxmoira (talk) 08:06, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeraxmoira: while I agree with you on SIGCOV, I can't see how the book written in 1992 by Sarah F. D. Ansari, British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow, Royal Holloway and Bedford New College, University of London could possibly be considered unreliable under WP:RAJ. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 10:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The point I am trying to make is that any source that talks about an event/BLP during the Raj era should be peer reviewed Jeraxmoira (talk) 10:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, according to the Wikipedia biography of the author, it was reviewed by Michel Boivin (CNRS, Paris) in the Bulletin Critique Des Annales Islamologiques in 1998 and by Seema Alavi in The Indian Economic & Social History Review in 1993. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:12, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the table, thank you! Jeraxmoira (talk) 13:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, and India. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @Fahads1982 and Faismeen: as members of Category:Translators ur-en with recent activity. Notability in this AfD may hinge on the first reference in the article, which is a book written in Urdu. Would you be able to check the references and establish whether there is WP:SIGCOV? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article does its subject no favours - it begins "Sayyid Ihsanullah Shah Rashdi was an 19th century Islamic scholar" but the next section says he was born in 1896. The quote in the "death" section is mangled to make no sense. What were his actual achievements, beyond running a (private?) library? The Sarah Ansari book Sufi Saints and State Power: the Pirs of Sind, 1843-1947 (Cambridge, 1992) ought to be an excellent RS, bang on this very obscure area, but it is only used to ref the litigation with his brother. He has no article in any other language. Khilafat Movement lists two other books, from BRILL and Columbia, that ought to be RS & very much on this topic. Does he appear in either? Johnbod (talk) 18:05, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've linked to him at Pir Jhando, where he seems to be mentioned (in a rather longer version of his name). Johnbod (talk) 18:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A search on Sufi Saints and State Power for the subject and his father returns nothing apart from the litigation. Same on the Columbia book as well! Jeraxmoira (talk) 19:52, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

blocked sockpuppet
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
References like 1 and 2/6 are key sources in a urdu language, offering insights into his work and life. Sarah FD's book primarily centers on his father and a Privy Court case against him, SaneFlint (talk) 20:00, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @Mar4d: as a currently active editor who had added themselves to Wikipedia:Translators_available#Urdu-to-English: Notability in this AfD may hinge on several Urdu references in the article. Would you be able to check them to establish whether there is WP:SIGCOV? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:55, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mar4d hasn't edited for 11 days, so I have gone ahead and accessed the first source (which most of the references rely on) through the Wikipedia Library, allowing me to download the 12 page PDF. I tried uploading it to Google Translate, which has a document translation facility, but this didn't work because the Urdu text is an image - it needs to be OCRed. I have been able to use Azure AI document intelligence to extract the Arabic script, and then used the translation facilities in Microsoft Word to translate the whole document. There are plenty mentions of the subject in the text - from what I can tell, most of the 12 pages of text is about him. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

blocked sockpuppet

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Could someone review references 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7? They contain crucial information mainly written in Urdu. Additionally, for more insights, consider searching for "Sayyid Ihsanullah Shah Rashdi" سید احسان اللہ شاہ راشدی in Urdu, as there is an article on Urdu Wikipedia. Many websites also use his name in Urdu and Sindhi. It will help for more deeper results on Google as well. Thanks.🙂

سید احسان اللہ شاہ راشدی SaneFlint (talk) 16:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: What may make a difference to the outcome of this discussion is the publication on Commons of two files, currently displayed in the article. I am unable to translate them at all. Thus I present them without further comment, save that the author of the article states that they are part of a tribute, read out in 1923, to the subject of the article. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

blocked sockpuppet

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

@Timtrent: If you have the Google Translate app or Microsoft Translator on your smartphone, with the app open you can point your camera at your PC screen and it will translate the text from Urdu into English. Good luck understanding the result though, given the lack of context! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It says Things from Pir Rushdullah Shah Rashdi are now transfered to Ihsanullah aka Fazalullah. he's now a sajadah Nashin. A successor etc Some praising qasida with mentions of Darul Rashad Madirsah being first to be established in Sind and mentions about his jamaat etc hope it helps 🙂 SaneFlint (talk) 21:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Leters are NOT reliable independent sources and photographs of them are even less reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 21:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is absolutely correctly stated. I feel, though, it may shed some light into the reality. It is an interesting artefact, but not a reliable one as far as we are concerned. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:07, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

True. It just shed lights on a topic. I again request everyone to focus on references especially urdu ones to be checked. REF 1 was confirmed/ checked by @Curb Safe Charmer I hope other as ref 2 and 5 6 7 etc will be checked and confirmed too thanks 😊 SaneFlint (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have yet to check that the statements cited to reference 1 are verifiable. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 22:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation was about subject name being mentioned or being there. 🙂

Please try to verify them your precious time will be appreciated 🙂 SaneFlint (talk) 07:17, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It looks like the discussion is ongoing regarding notability being established by Urdu-language references, so relisting to give more time to examine and discuss this as consensus as it stands is unclear.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aoidh (talk) 11:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Role in Khilafat Movement [47] p38-39, Only the father's name of the subject is mentioned during the establishment of the Sindh Provincial Khilafat Committee. Jeraxmoira (talk) 17:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

blocked sockpuppet

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi I think there is a misunderstandings on this mentioned pdf, Pir Ihsanullah Shah is known as Pir Jhandey or Pir of Jhando as well, Sames term For his father is used but here you can see https://ibb.co/ckV9FPP Pir Turab Ali Shah is second name of Rushidullah Shah he's mentioned on it and also Pir Jhandey Shah which term is also used for Ihsanullah Shah Rashdi, more about his achievements are mentioned in a reference nnumber1.

You can confirm Pir Jhandey Wala term being used for Ihsanullah in a reference number 1 page number 10, hope it helps 🙂 SaneFlint (talk) 18:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
p39 reads It was presided over by Pir Syed Abu Turab Muhammad Rashdullah Shah, Popularly known as Pir Jhandey Waley. At this point, I am wondering how "Pir Jhandey Walay" is being used for both the subject and his father. Jeraxmoira (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
his father and himself the subject both were known by same slogan Pir Jhandey Wala or Pir of jhando. Here you can see https://ibb.co/QbYR7bs reference number 1 page number 10, mentions same name Pir Jhandey. Also one thing is worth noting that in a pdf it says Pir Abu Turab Shah rashdi and Pir of Jhandey Shah attended but in a 39th page Pir Jhandey Shah is term used for Pir Rushdullah Aka Pir Abu Turab which was a second name of Rushdullah Shah as well.🙂 SaneFlint (talk) 18:44, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Misunderstandings are not uncommon, particularly given language subjects differences. It's understandable that English speakers may find certain nuances confusing. Moreover, could you kindly verify references for verification? Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated.🙂🙂 SaneFlint (talk) 18:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
two pictures I had uploaded on a page were 100 years older were removed. Claim was that picture doesn't contain subject name. Here is a translation which shows subject name on first - https://ibb.co/p4ZS4jd

I know translations are annoying but some words are worth noticing 🙂 SaneFlint (talk) 20:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. SaneFlint, a significant contributor to both the article and the discussion above, has now been blocked for sockpuppetry. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per my previous comment and source assessment above. Events mentioned in the article are merely notable, there are no other sources to verify it and its vaguely supported by the major contributor's word/ translations. There are instances of them trying to add unsourced content and deliberately introducing factual errors on quoted statements (discussion is on their talk page). This situation discredits their translations, particularly because we lack other Sindhi language editors to verify the information at this point. Jeraxmoira (talk) 06:23, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Current consensus is still unclear, but relisting to see if a consensus emerges. The sockpuppetry block of a major contributor to this AFD and the article itself may change the arguments presented.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:12, 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) 00:11, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Just not enough in RS to build an article. I get how passionate people are about this, but I don't see notability with the sources given. Oaktree b (talk) 01:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Source table above only has one good source, a few more and we'd be notable. Oaktree b (talk) 01:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Oaktree lacks indepth coverage.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:37, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per Oaktree b, lack in-depth coverage and having no information in books also, i searched about the subject. I searched in urdu “ احسان اللہ شاہ راشدی” also to have a look at urdu books but found nothing. — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 15:29, 27 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. I would personally like to keep this, but I don't see how any of the "keep" opinions have provided anything approaching SIGCOV. ATDs aren't discussed in any depth, but this doesn't preclude a redirect, or a future article with better sourcing; perhaps there is sourcing in other languages. Vanamonde (Talk) 13:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chilaun

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

A minor figure in the history of the Mongol Empire, Chilaun does not meet WP:GNG because no reliable source provides significant coverage on him. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, and Mongolia. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Only reference is a very old source and the current article does a poor job of a making a case for notability. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:53, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: WP:ATD can be a redirect/merge to his father Sorqan Shira. Curbon7 (talk) 22:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively spelled Chiraun. Curbon7 (talk) 19:30, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. So "non-notable" that pretty much every drama film or series about Genghis Khan has featured him as a character. That says something about his place in the story of Genghis Khan, surely. There appear to be plenty of references in the articles on other Wikipedias (e.g. Japanese). -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:12, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:OTHERLANGS/WP:TRIVIAL. The Japanese version is primarily a genealogy and secondly a summary of a thirteenth-century chronicle. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:01, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - As I'm perfectly sure you're aware, neither WP:OTHERLANGS nor WP:TRIVIAL actually relate to what I wrote. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - On the contrary, you outlined two arguments for Chilaun's notability Necrothesp: 1) that most entertainment about Genghis Khan features him, and 2) that other Wikipedias have articles on them with references in them. 1) is addressed by WP:TRIVIAL: "In order for a subject to be worthy of a standalone article, significant coverage that addresses the subject in detail is required, to the point that original research that involves extracting information is not needed." Entertainment about Genghis khan is not "significant coverage that addresses the subject", and "That says something about his place in the story of Genghis Khan, surely" is original research. 2) is addressed by WP:OTHERLANGS—just because interwiki articles are referenced does not mean that the references are reliable. Remember, Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Best wishes, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      - That's not what WP:OTHERLANGS says though. It merely says that just because a subject has an article on other wikis that doesn't mean it's notable enough for English Wikipedia. What I said was that there are references on other wikis, which is a different thing. As to WP:TRIVIAL, that doesn't refer to what I said either. My point was merely that the fact he is featured in most versions of the story of Genghis Khan suggests that he is a notable figure in that story. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:06, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - very notable. Known as one of Genghis Khan's "Four Knights", he was one of 4 commanders of Genghis Khan's personal guard. This Google translation of the Mongolian Wikipedia's article gives a good summary of Chilaun's importance.

The article already cites as a reference The Secret History of the Mongols which is described this way:

- "The Secret History is regarded as the single most significant native Mongolian account of Genghis Khan… The Secret History is regarded as a piece of classic literature in both Mongolia and the rest of the world."

Chilaun joins Genghis Khan's army in chapter 4, section 137, page 65 of this translation of the Secret History. (They're referred to as Čila'un and Cinggiss Quahan in that text). After that Chilaun appears frequently in the history.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

- A. B. I wasn't aware that a 13th-century semi-legendary chronicle was considered a WP:RS—my rewrite of our Genghis Khan article would have been a lot easier if that was the case. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 21:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I know zilch about the Mongols but if a character has been fake news since the 13th century isn't he/she/it just notable as part of the legendarium that's grown up around the definitely real Genghis Khan? This guy sounds like an important part of the storytelling if maybe not the historical record per se? jengod (talk) 05:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know what you mean by this Jengod. He was not "fake news", he was a real person who lived in the 12th and 13th centuries. He is just not described enough in WP:RS to be notable and thus have a Wikipedia article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:57, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  @AirshipJungleman29 I was thinking he was something like Friar Tuck in the Robin Hood stories. Like he's not necessarily historical but he's in most of the stories. Like if the unreliable sources are very old, and then people keep repeating those tales, even if they're provably incorrect or something, doesn't that myth making become notable in its own right? Like, "he shows up in movies X Y and Z but they're just making up stuff and it's ahistorical and fictive." The other thing I was thinking of is Sisi's mother-in-law and their relationship which has this whole public fanfic element that's been going on since the 1950s movie that is maybe not at all what it was like. I'm so totally not a Mongol person so I shoulda probably just kept quiet but it seems like (maybe?!) this guy needs some context where we explain--he's in zero reliable primary sources on the Mongols, but here's where people are getting their ideas about him and here's where that quasi-historic de novo character who was created ex post facto appears in the next 600 years of Mongol literature. Ok now I'm shutting up sorry jengod (talk) 05:19, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I don't agree with GNG. Apparently he was an important person. I added some new sources. It didn't take much time to find them. Instead of deleting we can find more sources and modify the article. Aredoros87 (talk) 21:28, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Please read WP:SIGCOV, Aredoros87. Two of your "sources" are clearly Google Books searches for "Dai Chopan", whoever that is, another does not mention Chilaun, and the fourth simply says "eles e o filho do guarda, Chilaun, eventualmente se tornaram generais de Genghis Khan". ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:50, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Right now it looks like "No consensus". A source analysis of the references cited in the article and discussion would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:36, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails GNG. There are no sources for a merge, no objection to a redirect. Source eval:

Comments	Source
About a genetic test, nothing that meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	1. Wen, Shao-Qing; Meng, Hai-Liang; Li, Hui (May 2021). "A genetic test for three historical hypotheses of the Mongolian Golden family origin of Tusi Lu's family, a response to a commentary on molecular genealogy of Tusi Lu's family reveals their paternal relationship with Jochi, Genghis Khan's eldest son". Journal of Human Genetics. 66 (5): 551–553. doi:10.1038/s10038-020-00861-2. ISSN 1435-232X. S2CID 254116339.
About a social group, does not mention Chilaun, nothing that meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	2. ^ Elizabeth Emaline Bacon (1951). The Hazara Mongols of Afghanistan: A Study in Social Organization. University of California, Berkeley. p. 32.
About a social group, does not mention Chilaun, nothing that meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	3. ^ Robert L. Canfield, Gabriele Rasuly-Paleczek (2010-10-04). Ethnicity, Authority and Power in Central Asia: New Games Great and Small. Routledge. ISBN 9781136927508.
Name mentioned, nothing that meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	4. ^ "Gengis Khan". history-maps.com. Retrieved 2023-12-13.

The Keep votes provide opinions, but no sources to eval except an unsourced Wikipedia article [48]. BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. No other wikipedias have sources with SIGCOV. // Timothy :: talk 20:24, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy, you omitted the most important ref. You noted that I provided a link to the Mongol Wikipedia article. I did not cite that as a source but rather to provide quick context for editors at this AfD without their having to read the entire Secret History of the Mongols.

The reference I cited was The Secret History of the Mongols including links to a translation as well as chapters and sections.

There are arguments above as to this famous piece of literature/history's reliability. As Jengod noted, that may not make a difference. The Bible is the main source of Juedo-Christian history about Abraham. Did Abraham really exist? Is the Bible historically reliable? Abraham is notable however you answer those questions. I argue that the same is true of Čila'un/Chilaun. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:06, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: As was explained above by AirshipJungleman29, The Secret History of the Mongols is not a historically reliable source, and it does not contain WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 22:59, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So no more Abraham or Bible, then? --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:24, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You must be kidding. There is an entire academic discipline dedicated to the study of these topics. In case you are unaware A. B., these are what we call reliable sources. The Bible is not a reliable source, and neither is the Secret History of the Mongols. Thanks TimothyBlue for doing the source analysis. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: If your comparison was valid (the Bible with the Secret History of the Mongols), you'd be able to show plenty of reliable sources showing notability and the discussion would be closed. I'm not taking your discussion bait on the Bible or Abraham, the discussion needs to stay focused on sources and guidelines, not speculative OTHERSTUFFEXISTS claims. // Timothy :: talk 22:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We’ll see. Right now, Timothy, I don’t think there’s consensus either way. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per Timothy I don't believe GNG is met, and I'm not persuaded that we should ignore GNG in this situation based on the arguments above. Daniel (talk) 00:14, 24 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. ✗plicit 00:35, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Firuzul Abdullah Haleel

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

Non-notable spox. Was previously draftified but author unilaterally moved past AfC back to main space, so here we are. Cites only one source, and a search finds nothing other than news of his appointment, or him doing his job ie. speaking for the administration, neither of which makes him notable. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ANYBIO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and Maldives. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here are few links I have found on him. In Maldives Media is mostly in local language.

He is appointed at the rank of Deputy Minister and so far local TV's are showing him since he is the official government spokesperson. On Point (3) found a live of him.

Hope this helps. Existence Leesaaisath 15:35, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No coverage other than him being quoted as a spokesperson. None of the sources provided by @Leesaaisath provide any significant or independent coverage. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 18:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the Boloney sources @Leesaaisath provided and that are on the article. Terrible page that doesn't demonstrate GNG.

AaronVick (talk) 02:50, 2 December 2023 (UTC) — AaronVick (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Comintell (talk · contribs). [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as User:AaronVick has been found to be a sockpuppet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I'd like to see a second opinion on the newly found sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:16, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete with no prejudice against recreation if something decent turns up, or his political career becomes more notable in future. The new references do not contribute enough to notability. The first is not about him or his political actions, it's about an issue where he was chosen as the government's spokesman. The second is merely a photograph confirming his name (different latinised spelling) and job title. The third I cannot assess as it's a local TV piece, but even if it contributes as strongly as possible, we're left with it, and the article's source, which merely says he's been appointed transitional spokesperson and two very minimalistic sentences about his education and most recent job. This is way, way short of enough to justify an article. Elemimele (talk) 14:28, 16 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.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strictly Ballroom (band) (3rd nomination)

People proposed additions

Roger Adam (via WP:PROD on 14 September 2023)

@@ Line 50: / Line 50: @@
 <!-- Only if additions to this section do not clearly fit with one of the aforementioned categories, then please feel free to list or transclude. -->
 <!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristie Puckett-Williams}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sri Edi Swasono}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhenald Kasali}}