Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

8 June 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< June 07	June 09 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Polish raid on Kievan Rus' (1136)[edit]

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

WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, WP:PRIMARY, WP:GNG, WP:NPOV. Follow-up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bolesław II the Bold's expedition to Kiev (1076–1077). User:SebbeKg created this article on 18 February 2024, 4 days before he was blocked indefinitely for Adding poorly sourced content, false accusations of vandalism. We still need to clean up the rubbish he added, checking whether there is anything left of value, and throwing away the rest. Bolesław II the Bold's expedition to Kiev (1076–1077) was deleted on 27 May. Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135) was AfD'd previously, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135), resulting in no consensus. But Marcelus did the right thing by removing all informations referenced to primary sources, as obvious OR. I decided to WP:BOLDly turn it into a redirect to Wiślica#History, where I added 1 sentence to summarise the incident based on a source which Piotrus and Marcelus agreed was RS.

As for this article itself, it is clearly written completely from a point of view of later Polish chroniclers who invented lots of details out of their own volition, dramatising and exaggerating stories they had heard or read about. This whole text is basking in emotions of "revenge for Wiślica". Evidently, there was a Volhynian raid on Wiślica in 1135, but I have not been able to find any sort of "Polish" retaliation against "Kievan Rus" in the next year. It is striking that not a single toponym is mentioned in this article, except the vague " Entire communities surrounding the Principality of Volhynia". No standard history work on Kievan Rus' I consulted mentions this event. Not even the Kievan Chronicle, that has quite detailed entries for every year, says anything about 1135, let alone 1136. (There was a raging conflict between the Monomakhovichi of Kiev and the Olgovichi of Chernigov in the north and centre, but no hint of a conflict between Poles and Volhynians on the western edges of the realm). If there really was a frenzied massacre, sparing no Ruthenian soul in Volhynia in 1136, the Kievan Chronicle and modern literature would have talked about it. There is no reason for us Wikipedians to take the fanciful claims of later Polish chronicles at face value, especially from the hands of a now-blocked user with a poor record of using sources on this topic. NLeeuw (talk) 23:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Poland, and Ukraine. NLeeuw (talk) 23:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. First, I'll note that I reverted the de-facto blanking of Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135). There was no consensus to delete the article, so I find what happened since (Marcelus removal of 95% of the article, and then your redirecting it) to be against the outcome of the AfD. Feel free to start a new AfD for it if you desire (although note I've also modernized the article by adding the RS we found, which pretty much states the event might be a fabrication by old chroniclers... - but, IMHO, it is a notable topic).
Now, regarding the article nominated here. I do agree that the creator of this (these) articles was overly reliant on old primary sources. The article nominated here has only one footnote to a presumed modern source, and poorly formatted at that. I would be fine with this being redirected to the "Ruthenian raid...", if we can find a single non-historical mention of this event in modern RS. Otherwise, well, can't justify keeping this due to problematic sourcing to ~1000 year old chronicles whose authors clearly liked to invent history, not just record it :( I.e. in the current state, afer all I wrote, I guess I am not leaning to weak delete this one. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus Thanks for your input. I responded at length at Talk:Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135)#Historiography for discussion on the 1135 event. It is interesting, but complicated.

For the 1136 article, did you mean to say "I am *now leaning" instead of I am not leaning? NLeeuw (talk) 08:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nederlandse Leeuw Yes, I am leaning. Sorry, was writing while taking care of a baby :) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear from more editors on this one since the consensus is less than clear.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St. James Armenian Church[edit]

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

Unsourced article with no indication of notability. A BEFORE search finds nothing but run-of-the-mill local coverage of the church, and it's not a registered historic building. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Religion, Armenia, and Massachusetts. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021 English Channel disaster[edit]

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

The article concerns a single incident of the ongoing English Channel migrant crossings (2018–present) and does not need to have its own article. Firsttwintop (talk) 22:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Troy Stetina[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

I nominated this before but it was closed as no consensus since there were no other participates. Some reasoning as before applies: fails WP:MUSICBIO and quite promotional. Can’t find any in-depth sources on the subject. The cited Washington Post article [1] is about the subject’s father, Wayne Stetina. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 21:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 21:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Indiana, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basanth Sadasivan[edit]

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

Minor coverage in mediocre sources, but doesn’t appear to meet the WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 21:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Travel and tourism, and Singapore. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 21:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: England and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Braden Olthoff[edit]

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

fails WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 21:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Baseball. Joeykai (talk) 21:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CW 24 News[edit]

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

CW 24 News doesn't exist. Its existence is fabricated on several global Wikipedia and Wikiquote national pages, by two users (sock puppets or meat puppets) GQO and Beach Mirco Viejo and a few IP addresses (196.135.135.177, 154.187.210.6, 196.150.237.159, 196.135.169.232, 196.150.148.109, 154.189.72.22), since May 2024. Even the CW24News.com domain has only been established in April 2024 (for a newspaper that supposedly exists since 1973 and was co-founded by Anwar Sadat. All of the links and supporting info turned out to be nonsense. The cw24news.com website looks pretty real, until you see that it was created in Wordpress, and that the social media links are all phony (going to the template creator). Also: the Media Ownership Monitor doesn't show CW 24 News ownership by Egypt Media Group. Note also that there are a number of "CW 24 News" "logos" in Commons that seem to be completely made up by these perpetrators. I realize that this is cross-wiki spam, but I don't know how to easily make this into a cross-wiki "case". Any help in this respect will be appreciated. _W^\|/_haledad (Talk to me) 20:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Egypt. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Really Cool Airlines[edit]

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

This was prod by Drmies as "Lousy sourcing full of announcements for something that may or may not exist a half a year from now." This is not notable, the sources are over a year old and the "airline" isn't even flying and the three sources for the proposed date are word for word (reads as if it was a PR). This can be undeleted if it ever gets off the ground. Bidgee (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Bidgee (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Thailand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elyria-Lorain Broadcasting Co.[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the WP:NCORP. Let'srun (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Radio, Companies, and Ohio. Let'srun (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of awards and nominations received by Rashmika Mandanna[edit]

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

This article sets a bad precendent. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of awards and nominations received by Priyamani. Fails CFORK, NLIST this information could very easily be accommodated in the main article, there is no need for a stand alone list, has not been discussed as a group by independent non-promotional reliable sources. No need to delete this article, only merge it back to Rashmika Mandanna. The number of awards and nominations seem dubious here [2], might just be fan work. DareshMohan (talk) 19:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Rashmika Mandanna: Too soon and too short. Kailash29792 (talk) 20:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Awards, Lists, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bowdon Railway[edit]

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

I couldn't establish that it meets WP:ORG / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 19:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Georgia (U.S. state). Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A good amount of coverage in book and newspapers. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phat mi Khorat[edit]

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Thailand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shahid Siddiqui (politician)[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Recreated after soft delete. Still no evidence of meeting WP:NPOL * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Still nothing to establish notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and India. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Probably have enough for a basic article [3] and [4] are RS. What's used in the article now are primary sources. Oaktree b (talk) 19:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first one doesn’t really counter towards GNG for me. The second one I can’t assess right now and I don’t know why. The first one just isn’t enough for me to reconsider my !vote. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Crofts[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. There is some coverage of his resignation as a councillor but nothing independent about his political or professional career. Reads like a CV. Orange sticker (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and United Kingdom. Orange sticker (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cavalcade station[edit]

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

Couldn't find any reliable sources for this article, even newspapers as well. Fails WP:GNG and WP:VERIFY. I don't see how this article can be on this website. To me, this needs to be discussed. GoodHue291 (talk) 16:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found general mention of this station on travel websites but nothing that would qualify as a source for this article. It seems to violate WP:NRV. Garsh (talk) 18:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The other stations on this line seem to have similar sourcing/depth of content. Is there any particular reason you focused on this station specifically for this AfD? Jumpytoo Talk 21:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Hynds[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. Does not pass WP:BASIC either. Subject never held any NPOL-passable office. Generally fails notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Northern Ireland. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Förbundet Arbetarfront[edit]

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NORG. WP:BEFORE shows no results in modern Swedish media archives or on Google Scholar/Books. 7 newspaper entries on https://tidningar.kb.se/ which I can't access in full but the text that is visible suggests mostly trivial mentions of arranging meetings and similar. AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Sweden. AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcin Trębacki[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. PROD removed without explanation. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dominika Polakowska[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aneta Kowalska[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Poland. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Some limited coverage here, here, and here, which I think is evidence of further offline coverage. JTtheOG (talk) 22:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandra Maksimova[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Belarus. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandr Levintsov[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, Poland, and Ukraine. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandr Anichenko[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Azerbaijan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Programme level[edit]

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

Ambiguous term, unsourced and I found it difficult to find good sources to add. Boleyn (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Radio, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bridges construction[edit]

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

I declined User:Flemmish Nietzsche's speedy ("dup of Bridge") because it's more of a subtopic/content fork. However, as it stands this article does not actually make the case for being a coherent topic. The parent article is not large and this child article appears to have few if any cites that support its topic claims (historical facts, engineering opinions, etc.). The cites are for small specific details. There are too many different types of bridges, each with own construction method, and each already has its own article. And I agree bridges already has both well-cited history and a well-linked summary-style of the types. DMacks (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As the nominator for deletion under A10. Of course not all the content is an exact duplicate, but it appears to be a translation from the Russian article, and "Bridges construction" is essentially the same topic as bridges, so I thought A10 would work here under WP:SNOW of this ever being a keep at AfD. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 14:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The same editor as created the enwiki article is the only substantive contributor to that ruwiki article. That's not a license problem. DMacks (talk) 15:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not saying it is a license issue, rather it's an issue with the ruwiki contributor trying to push their translation of their russian article onto enwiki when we already have an article on bridges, which again is essentially the same thing as "bridges construction". Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 15:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Obviously not disputing that aspect. DMacks (talk) 16:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the "Bridge" page there is no information about the methods and stages of constructing bridges. Therefore, the "Bridges construction" page is planned primarily to describe various technologies for creating bridges, and these two pages will not compete with each other. VasilijB (talk) 18:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Engineering, and Transportation. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ATG (autophagy acronym)[edit]

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

I'm unsure of the need for a separate article on an acronym which offers nothing more than a few lines of basic non-encyclopedic synthesis. Could be covered in Autophagy instead. X (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete First off, it's not even an acronym. Second, a search for ATG leads to a disambig page that has listings for autophagy and autophagy-related genes and proteins, which seems much more specific than anything this page offers. Third, as the nom said, the article is essentially about the use of the "ATG" shorthand in biology, which isn't anything that can't be mentioned in a half-sentence in the gene or autophagy articles. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:38, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 14:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Front for the Liberation of the Golan (3rd nomination)

Nullarbor (demoparty)[edit]

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources (including by searching in Trove). Also, the Nullarbor website had a section for media coverage; many of the sources listed there either aren't reliable, don't provide significant coverage, or aren't independent (media/press releases). A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 12:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Video games, Visual arts, Events, Computing, and Australia. toweli (talk) 12:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Academic dress of universities in Queensland, Australia[edit]

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

While certainly interesting, not encyclopaedic and not notable. WP:NOTDATABASE 5225_C (talk • contributions) 12:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Australia. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 12:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Australia. Owen× ☎ 12:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second inauguration of Nayib Bukele[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

The maintenance tag claiming sources exist. However, most of the sources are not about the inauguration but the current affairs of nation that is covered in 2024_Salvadoran_general_election#Presidency_of_Nayib_Bukele and Nayib_Bukele#Presidency, i.e. [5]. There is nothing much at least in the English sources about the preparation of the event, what transpired during the event, and any post event celebrations, with exception of a bombing plot, and a protest in Chicago, both of which can be easily tucked into 2024_Salvadoran_general_election#Aftermath. – robertsky (talk) 12:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of El Salvador-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 12:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Politics. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy redirect/merge to Nayib_Bukele#Presidency. Don't make articles just for the sake of making articles. Inaugurations do not automatically need a standalone page. Reywas92^Talk 17:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luis Hernández (footballer, born 1992)[edit]

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

Potentially fails WP:GNG here. I found him on Transfermarkt and Soccerway but these don't count towards notability. I found some brief mentions in La Brecha, Pasión Rojiblanca and ESPN but none of this can be considered significant coverage. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 17:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malek Rahmati[edit]

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

I first saw this article when I was searching about the 2024 Varzaqan helicopter crash. I prefer the information of this article in other websites, while its information here be transferred on the article about the 2024 helicopter crash.

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isochem[edit]

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

The company is a wholly owned subsidiary PMC Group International which does not have a wiki page or non-primary articles on it by reliable publications. of https://www.chemanager-online.com/en/news/pmc-buys-isochems-pharma-business Mixmon (talk) 11:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and France. Owen× ☎ 12:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No valid reason to delete. You have not proved that Isochem itself fails GNG. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 19:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karsten Henriksen[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPERSON. Non-notable individual, run-of-the-mill educational administrator. No claim of notability (except perhaps for the Platinum Jubilee Medal, but even that was given to 420 000 individuals worldwide). WP:PROMO, reads like a WP:RESUME. Potentially violation of WP:COI as the editor is a single topic editor, and claims to own the copyright of a picture of the subject. Melmann 11:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yael Pineda[edit]

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

A really poorly sourced article on a BLP about a footballer that briefly played in the 2nd tier of Mexico. The best that I could find was Futbol Sapiens, which is not enough to show a WP:GNG pass. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 17:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 22:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanie Cameron[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPOL, WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. None of the political positions occupied by this subject is NPOL-passable. Also fails GNG or BASIC generally. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Women, and Australia. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping to add some more info in a couple hours but won't be able to so I won't contest the deletion. DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 11:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You definitely should be able to make improvements. This nomination doesn’t stop you. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I looked for her and found many people with this name... I put Tasmania in the search box and found very little about her: fails WP:GNG. Also, Deputy-mayors and councillors of themselves are not considered notable according to WP:politician. They need significant press coverage for that— Iadmc ♫^talk 12:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Tanay bus accident[edit]

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

Fails Wikipedia:Notability (events). No evidence of lasting effects based on GNews Archives and GBooks search. GNews shows a temporary ban on field trips which lasted merely six months. A brief and cited mention is already at List_of_traffic_collisions_(2000–present)#2017 so a redirect ther can be an alternative to deletion. I've also added the reference mentioned above as a citation in said entry. Lenticel ^(talk) 09:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Philippines. Lenticel ^(talk) 09:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - Per nominator

TheNuggeteer (talk) 09:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this well-developed article as a legitimate SPINOFF that passes EVENT. Just 7 years have passed since this accident in which 50 people died. Societal impact beyond the event was acknowledged by nom. Deleting this article will further increase the disparity between the accidents that are being kept and deleted for developed countries versus developing countries. gidonb (talk) 10:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Nueva Ecija bus accident[edit]

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

Fails Wikipedia:Notability (events). No evidence of lasting effects based on GNews Archives and GBooks search. A brief and cited mention is already at List_of_traffic_collisions_(2000–present)#2017 so a redirect ther can be an alternative to deletion. Lenticel ^(talk) 09:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Philippines. Lenticel ^(talk) 09:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zero-install[edit]

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

Article has been undeleted following soft deletion from the previous AfD. Despite that, I still think that this fails WP:NPRODUCT and WP:NSOFT, as searching for "zero install" (with quotes) on Google returned no reliable independent secondary sources. GTrang (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I have changed the article so it now describes a concept, not the particular bit of software, and therefore think that the WP:GNG is more applicable. Some of the old information (about some product) is kept as a section. I am not attached to this text, so if it helps to keep the article, the whole section "Zero Install" (note the uppercase letters) can go. A decent amount of OK sources can be found if the same search is performed on Google Scholar. The problem is that most of these sources do not provide much coverage. The only coherent source found by me that has WP:SIGCOV is a bachelor's thesis, and thus somewhat weak from the reputability perspective. --Викидим (talk) 04:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep since it is not a product, but a kind of process the essays are not relevant. I think more time is required to allow improvement. I remember this concept from over a decade ago, so it is not a new-fangled idea. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yet another option to consider is to merge the lead into Installation (computer programs)#Necessity (renaming the destination section accordingly). The destination section currently has no sources. --Викидим (talk) 05:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This article has become some kind of Frankenstein combination page that disambiguates between several usages of the term zero-install, even though the article was originally about a specific piece of software. I would rather have this article deleted and then a new article created about zero-install created, if the general concept is even notable in the first place. Notability doesn't stack -- using the term in two different contexts to establish notability is very confusing. HyperAccelerated (talk) 19:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The only sources related to a concept itself are: a B. S. WP:SCHOLARSHIP thesis (it's not even masters!) only cited by a patent and the software; and a WP:RESEARCHGATE paper that does not appear to be in any peer-reviewed journal or have significant citations. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a term, I don't think it currently meets WP:NEO though it might meet Wiktionary's inclusion criteria... I'm not actually sure, I don't really edit there. Depends on if there's a third use and the two currently cited count as "durably archived" I guess, which seems plausible enough. Delete. (actually, now that I think about it a bit more, it might get deleted on wikt: as a sum of parts) Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Ho King[edit]

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

Highly unlikely to pass the WP:10YEARTEST (and WP:SUSTAINED). Content which isn't related to the song isn't substantial enough to merit a stand-alone article. – Hilst [talk] 15:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Music, and Companies. – Hilst [talk] 15:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it not only got popular because of the feud but it has been in business since 1976. So it will continue to be in the news and magazines (especially local ones like Now) as it has been for the last several decades Freedun (yippity yap) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it will get coverage because it is a very popular restaurant in toronto regardless of the feud Freedun (yippity yap) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, took a spin through the hits, and before the feud there’s not enough coverage for an article, just lists, listicles, coverage of nearby crime, and one art collective that named itself after the restaurant, everyday restaurant coverage stuff, not anything that would give the restuarant lasting notability. Ruth Bader Yinzburg (Ruth Bader Yinzburg)

Here are some news articles from a long while before the feud. [6] [7] Freedun (yippity yap) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud. The Midnite Wolf (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud or delete. There is no SIGCOV outside the feud and a shooting that occurred in proximity of the restaurant, therefore not enough to pass GNG independently. --hroest 17:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Dickov[edit]

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

Poorly sourced women's footballer. The two independent sources in the article are a trivial mention and an interview with minimal routine coverage. I can't find any WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 07:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Scotland. JTtheOG (talk) 07:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 17:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Star Hill Ponies[edit]

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Comics and animation, United Kingdom, and Wales. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I found a newspaper article called "Trotting towards stardom" in the South Wales Evening Post, April 1999, and one called "Titanic tricks for TV puppets" in the Western Daily Press, April 1999. Toughpigs (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, given what was presented here and on the page (thanks Toughpigs) or at the very least Redirect to Bumper Films, if the said sources are really found insufficient. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:09, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 07:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WTAM-LD[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG; some references are outdated. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 07:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Florida. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 07:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.: A history (which, despite what the article implies, actually goes back to the early 1990s, albeit with the license history being severed via a digital companion channel) of mostly national services isn't the path to significant coverage, even before HC2/Innovate took over. There may well be something out there (as best I can tell this is actually this article's first deletion nomination — it wasn't part of that bulk nomination of many other HC2/Innovate station articles), but as currently written this is another remnant of the far looser inclusion standards of 2006. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very Important Party[edit]

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Events, Computing, and France. toweli (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Demoscene#List of demoparties. — Maile (talk) 13:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Off Road with Gul Panag[edit]

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Satja Nai Chum Joan (Suea Sung Fah III)[edit]

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Thailand. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Looking up สัจจะในชุมโจร turns up lots of coverage (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL), though as is usual for entertainment news, a lot of it is based on supplied PR material. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:36, 26 May 2024 (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, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First part has a page, 2nd part too, so, coverage allowing verification, I'm in favour of Keeping this as a short (detailed) article. If the identified coverage is judged insufficiently independent, Redirect to Suea Sung Fah. Opposed to deletion.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sokpoly Voeun[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Semi-advertorialized article about a filmmaker and photographer, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for filmmakers or photographers. The strongest attempted notability claim here is a table of "nominations" for awards at various film festivals, except there aren't actually real awards in the mix here: three of the listed festivals are just "screened" or "selected", with no evidence of any actual award nominations or wins shown at all, and most of them are "to be announced" because the festival is still in the future and hasn't even released its program announcements yet, so it still isn't even confirmed that the film will even screen there at all, let alone win any awards.
All of them, further, are "sourced" to the self-published websites of the film festivals themselves, rather than media coverage, and the rest of the footnotes are also a mix of primary and unreliable sources that aren't support for notability, rather than WP:GNG-building coverage in media or books.
There's also a possible conflict of interest here, as the creator and primary other editor have been blocked as sockpuppets in an WP:SPI check following their behaviour in the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reign in Slumber discussion. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Photography, and Cambodia. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sack of Wiślica[edit]

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

As

a follow-up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135) (nominated by User:TimothyBlue; closed as no consensus on 6 April 2024); and
a formalised continuation of the informal discussion at Talk:Sack of Wiślica#Historiography (2–5 June 2024, with an extensive examination of the sources used, and its complete absence in Kievan Rus' / Ruthenian chronicles where one would expect the 1135 raid and the alleged 1136 counter-raid to be mentioned); and
a parallel to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polish raid on Kievan Rus' (1136) (currently has little participation, but seems to be heading for a weak delete),

I hereby formally propose to either draftify Sack of Wiślica (if any editor is willing to adopt it), or to redirect it to Wiślica#History. (Note: Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135) was renamed to Sack of Wiślica on 3 June 2024‎ by agreement between NLeeuw and Piotrus on the talk page, so this could be regarded as a 2nd nomination of Ruthenian raid on Poland (1135)).

Rationale: WP:NOPAGE; fails WP:SIGCOV for WP:GNG for a stand-alone page, and the sources used so far create WP:POV issues as well. It is one of several dubious articles written by now-blocked User:SebbeKg (previously we agreed to delete SebbeKg's article Bolesław II the Bold's expedition to Kiev (1076–1077) on 27 May). Editors seem to agree that the event took place, but nothing for certain can be said about in detail, as all the sources cited are either WP:PRIMARY (Kadłubek, and in the case of Długosz someone who wrote centuries later and added details that are not historically credible), or WP:USERGENERATED & WP:POV (in the case of KWORUM), or WP:SELFPUB (in the case of Dawne Kieleckie). Everyone agrees that the only substantial WP:RS is Benyskiewicz (2020), and that this source alone is not enough.

The disagreement is that User:Piotrus would like to keep a stand-alone page based on RS that are yet to be found, and that someone else should find and add these yet-to-be-found RS (citing WP:BEFORE), whereas User:Marcelus and I think that this event could easily be summarised in 1 to 3 sentences in Wiślica#History by reference to Benyskiewicz (2020), at least for now. Alternately, Marcelus and I think the current article could be draftified for now, but Piotrus has declined my offer to adopt it as a draft, citing having too little time to do it himself, and proposing to add Template:Sources exist to motivate other users to do it instead. However, the template does not allow such usage (see also Wikipedia:But there must be sources!). I have argued that the present situation of keeping the article in the mainspace as is, is not acceptable either, because it evidently is not ready for the mainspace (if it ever merits a stand-alone article at all).

So, if nobody is willing to adopt the draft, Marcelus and I are proposing to redirect Sack of Wiślica to Wiślica#History until an editor (Piotrus or someone else) finds enough material, based on WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS, written with an WP:NPOV, for a stand-alone page, and has written that page. I already created such a redirect WP:BOLDly, which was BOLDly reverted by Piotrus, and that is fine per WP:BRD. But if there is consensus in this AfD to create a redirect, this may not be reverted BOLDly again until the conditions above for a stand-alone page are met.

Other than that I would like to say that I have generally enjoyed cooperating with Piotrus on this topic amicably. But a formal decision seems to be necessary to break the deadlock on the future of this article, and Piotrus has suggested that taking it to AfD a second time might settle the matter, so here I am. Good day to everyone. :) NLeeuw (talk) 06:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Poland, and Ukraine. NLeeuw (talk) 06:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Poland. Owen× ☎ 12:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bago University Students' Union[edit]

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

I have performed WP:BEFORE and searched for in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources. However, I found only these:

These sources are just passing mentions. The subject fails to meet WP:GNG. The majority of sources that are cited are about the protest and arrest, where other people and this union's members were arrested. Does this establish notability? Please ping me if you find any in-depth coverage of the subject. GrabUp - Talk 10:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and Myanmar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bombing of Toncontín International Airport[edit]

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

Unneccessary WP:FORK of Football War, already covered there in a few sentences. Page unlikely to be expanded nor new RS published Mztourist (talk) 05:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

u can delete if u want Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

or i i can change text Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i can change the text Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, El Salvador, and Honduras. jlwoodwa (talk) 07:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and Merge. I agree on having the article deleted, besides the fact that I'm also having it's information merged on the Football War article. (talk) 10:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris King and Vicki Grant[edit]

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

This article doesn't have reception or signification coverage about the character, and the hero forms section was written awfully or its fully redundant; thus failing WP:GNG. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:32, 25 May 2024 (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, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because they were separated from the Dial H for Hero page by @Jhenderson777: to keep the page from getting too long like the Black Canary page or merge Chris King and his superhero forms to List of Marvel Comics characters: K and Vicki Grant and her superheroine forms to List of Marvel Comics characters: G in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE if the latter happens. --Rtkat3 (talk) 18:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Supplemental Result[edit]

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

Procedural nomination as the post-WP:BLAR redirect was rejected at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Supplemental Result. One suggestion was to add content about the subject at the Google (I assume Google Search) article. Jay 💬 05:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, Internet, Software, and Websites. Jay 💬 05:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure but page looks to me to've been AI-written. Hyperbolick (talk) 05:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt. The article was created in 2007 and BLARd in 2017. Jay 💬 06:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Prob not then. Hyperbolick (talk) 19:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Bekemeier[edit]

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

Doesn't meet WP:NACTOR and WP:BIO. I can't find any WP:RS. Claggy (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to editing wikipedia. He is an actor/stuntman in SAG-AFTRA who has a world record and a couple of online fandoms. I am not sure what wp:rs, wp:nactor, wp:bio? If you can help me understand and fix this page rather than deleting it, I would greatly appreciate it.

I see what those things are now and he HAS had notable roles. He was the boogeyman in The Boogeyman and the main entity in the film Imaginary, among other films. Please look at his IMDB for background if you insist he has not been in enough. And his world record is clearly linked on this page. Or is that also not enough? He is well known for his contributions to the Atlanta stunt and contortion community. As far as reliable sources... is the Guinness site and IMDB not enough? Of course there are no peer-reviewed articles as he is a stuntman... I am happy to try to add more sources, but those are fairly reputable for this line of work.

I motion to move this to the improvements page instead of deletion. I am open to any suggestions for improvement.

Cheers,

cashworth6

@cashworth6: "WP" stands for Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia requires that its subjects be notable to prevent people from adding information that isn't verifiable and is in many cases incorrect.

There are several policies that determine whether a subject is notable. You should start by reading WP: N (general notability guidelines), then reading WP: NACTOR (specific guidelines for establishing notability for actors), WP: BIO (guidelines for notability about people), and WP: RS (guidelines for what is and isn't a reliable source). These are guidelines that users use to argue whether an article should be kept or deleted. You should also read WP: AFD to get an overview of how the deletion process works.

IMDB contains user generated content under WP: IMDB, so it isn't reliable. Anyone can add anything, including incorrect information, to IMDB. The Guinness source mentions him as a record holder and names his occupation. This doesn't meet the standard for in-depth coverage. If you can find reliable sources that cover the subject in-depth (e.g. a passage about him in the New York Times, a section in a book about stuntmen that discusses his work), then this would improve the article to where it should not be deleted. You're free to ask any questions here or on my talk page if you wish, but please read these policies in their entirety before doing so. HyperAccelerated (talk) 13:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(for the avoidance of doubt, this is a description of the nomination and not a vote) HyperAccelerated (talk) 13:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help and I apologize for my confusion. Cashworth6 (talk) 15:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete little to no sourcing in anything found; what's used now isn't enough and I can't find any listings of this person. To the comments above, the Imdb isn't a reliable source, Guinness records aren't useful and being in the union isn't notable. We'd require articles written about this person, somewhere, in order to be notable here. Oaktree b (talk) 19:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DUnit[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Astorga Junquera[edit]

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

Subject has a stable article at Spanish Wikipedia but notability according to English Wikipedia guidelines for either WP:GNG, WP:NACADEMIC or WP:ARTIST isn't evident. I'd like to hear what others think. Rkieferbaum (talk) 01:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Artists, and Venezuela. Rkieferbaum (talk) 01:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notable Any biography: The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field- His recognized contribution to Digital Art Curation. HarveyPrototype (talk) 20:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recognized by whom? The term "digital art curation" does not even appear in the article. Geschichte (talk) 04:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I am not finding reliable sources to show notability. There are huge swaths of unreferenced material in the article about his career. IMDB and Facebook citations are unreliable. Fails WP:GNG. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am also having difficulty finding significant coverage in reliable sources. This is mostly due to translation issues and there seems to be some mixing of info on this subject and their father, mixing information on Juan Astorga Junquera, and Juan Astorga, Juan Astorga Anta, etc. This subject's father, Juan Astorga Anta was the first director of the Museum of Modern Art in Merida and it is named after him ("Museo de Arte Moderno Juan Astorga Anta").[8]) There might some salvageable article here, but leaning towards delete at this time Elspea756 (talk) 14:47, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Agcaoili[edit]

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

Almost entirely the work of User:Greyhat, who, based on the deleted edit summaries for File:Phil Agcaoili 2011.jpg, has been in personal contact with the subject. Unclear the subject is notable, and the article is highly promotional. The company he founded is apparently not notable enough to have an article. -- Beland (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Internet, Georgia (U.S. state), New York, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SagamoreHill Broadcasting[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the WP:NCORP because of a lack of in-depth coverage. PROD was contested so bringing it to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and Georgia (U.S. state). Let'srun (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: While I am unable to find indepth articles specifically about SagamoreHill Broadcasting, I did see plenty of articles that mention the company and articles about the stations it owns. Hkkingg (talk) 07:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Fox (author)[edit]

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

Appears to be overly promotional and shows no sign of meeting WP:GNG due to lack of RS. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 03:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Entertainment, Finance, Law, Internet, California, Michigan, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vortex - We got a notice that this page was flagged for deletion. Great timing as I have been meaning to hopefully update it. The info is old and not entirely accurate as it was written by fans of my books years ago. Can u share any guidance on how we can improve its "notability" to meet Wikipedia standards? Also what is "RS"? You're probably a volunteer so thanks for all the work you do for the Wikipedia community. Scott Nelsonave21 (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Scott. Please read this link WP:GNG for the general standards to meet "notability". On Wikipedia, RS stands for "reliable sources". For authors, this commonly includes reviews of your books. None of the sources cited on the article are WP:RS because they are just raw interviews of you, only mention you briefly (see WP:GNG for more info) or are written by Forbes contributors (see this link WP:FORBES for info on deciding what Forbes articles count as RS).

Also, yes, like many editors on Wikipedia, I am a volunteer and edit as a hobby :) — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mention: @Nelsonave21 — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, I'm concerned about you saying "We got a notice that this page was flagged for deletion." Just a head's up — if you got an email about this, please be aware that scammers have targeted people whose articles have been deleted or flagged for deletion before (WP:SCAM), offering to restore it or something similar. Most, if not all, of these offers are fradulent. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 09:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vortex: thank you for this detailed reply. This is super helpful. We will work on it. What is the best way to submit or update? Is there a timeline? Thanks again, including for the accurate warning about the (likely scammy) deletion email we received. Nelsonave21 (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nelsonave21: Please see WP:AFD, particularly this line: If you wish for an article to be kept, you can directly improve the article to address the reasons for deletion given in the nomination. You can search [for] reliable sources so that the article meets notability guidelines. AfD discussion like this one are kept open for at least seven days before a decision is made (multiple editors have to give their opinions first before a decision about the consensus can be made, so this discussion will probably go on for longer).

In your case, editing the article yourself would be COI editing, which is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. However, you can find examples of reliable sources about you or your books and post it here, on this AfD, to prove the article meets WP:GNG. This would prevent deletion. Again, most RS for authors takes the form of book reviews in newspapers, magazines, or periodicals.

If this AfD is closed with consensus to delete the article, the article can be recreated if and only if it satisfies WP:GNG. In this case, I recommend the AfC process, which involves writing a draft article and submitting it for review. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 06:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've not reviewed the article yet, but while it is normal for an AFD discussion to be closed within a week or a month, don't worry too much about that, you can usually get an admin to restore the contents as a draft or by email if you'd like to work on it. "Deletion" is not generally irreversible. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The USA Today won't open, the rest are non-RS per Cite Highlighter. Unfortunately, I don't see book reviews, nor much of anything for this person. No notability found, does not pass AUTHOR. Oaktree b (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Sullo[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SNG. Purely written for promotion. Article's author also wrote Nikto (vulnerability scanner) - subject closely related to the article in nomination. (Note: The author (User:Root exploit) also self-describes themselves as "Security Researcher" on their userpage). --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Internet, United States of America, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay of Evelix[edit]

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

Completely unsourced except a dead link; cannot find any references to the family as a whole rather than individual members. Rusalkii (talk) 04:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or Redirect: inadequate BEFORE - the usual sources for baronetcies (cf the many hundreds of other articles on baronetcies) are available if anyone takes the trouble to look. However, it's true that the article is in poor shape and inaccurate in part, by comparison with Cokayne (the standard and authoritative reference on baronetcies). The article can be corrected from that, but frankly, little would be lost if it were redirected to Lindsay baronets#Lindsay baronets, of Evelick (1666) (per WP:ATD - "Lindsay of Evelix" is a plausible search term), where the additional references would be more useful. Ingratis (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- see below Ingratis (talk) 05:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are "the usual sources"? I'm not very familiar with this area, I'm just reviewing old unsourced articles. Rusalkii (talk) 23:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or Merge with Lindsay baronets. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 13:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{clarifying above !vote) - I think Redirect is the way to go. The "usual sources" - i.e. baronetages - give the details of the title's descent, which is what they're for, but the nominator is correct that there seems to be very little additional information about the family as such, and the title can be adequately dealt with at the article Lindsay baronets, where I've added the reference from Cokayne's Complete Baronetage. I don't see that there's really anything to merge, as further details relate to individuals who already have their own articles. Ingratis (talk) 06:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poitín (band)[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:BAND criteria. The founder and main contributor of the site is apparently someone from the band and the page is more a self-presentation. FromCzech (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughts. Do you have any suggestions to avoid it being deleted? Poitin31 (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious as well how to avoid deletion (I'm not a member of this band in case of any accusation of self-presentation). Kmarty (talk) 11:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the band does not meet WP:BAND criteria, there is no way to prevent deletion. FromCzech (talk) 05:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need to hear more opinions from editors about this article and what should happen with it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I cannot see multiple reliable sources having covered this band in sufficient detail to meet notability requirements. C 679 13:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CsUnit[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG. Has one ref from a predatory journal. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cuppa (Java library)[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article was quite obviously created by the developer. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:57, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Calvo (baseball)[edit]

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

This does not meet the criteria for notability. A Google search yields no results outside of Baseball-Reference. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Baseball, and Mexico. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Found some brief mentions on newspapers.com such as [[9]] and [[10]], but not enough there to meet the GNG. I'd guess there is probably enough coverage in Mexico to meet the notability guidelines, though. Let'srun (talk) 11:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bernardo Calvo[edit]

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

This article does not meet the notability criteria. There are simply no references to him on the internet other than compendiums of baseball stats which include his name. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Baseball, and Mexico. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Found some routine coverage on newspapers.com such as [[11]] and [[12]], but nothing that is GNG worthy. However, it is quite possible that there are Mexican sources that could help this subject meet the notability guidelines. Let'srun (talk) 11:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AdaControl[edit]

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

Fails WP: N. PROD removed by article creator who added a user testimony. Since this testimony is self-published, it cannot be used to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The testimony is from Jacob Sparre Andersen, editor of the Ada User Journal and a subject-matter expert. I also found ~~[13]~~ and [14]. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:40, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've struck [1] as the bulk of this information is copied from AdaControl's website, as is was the article lede. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I get an access denied error when viewing [2]. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Login to the WP:TWL. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HyperAccelerated Sorry, I didn't realize that it was an expiring link. While archive.org deems this upload to be spam, go to [15] and click on the first result. Aaron Liu (talk) 03:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that source isn't independent though. It's published by a committee called QualOSS. One of the members of QualOSS, as listed on the first page of their report, is AdaCore. AdaCore has provided services for the benefit of Adalog -- see this document that suggests a substantial rewrite of one of Adalog's systems. HyperAccelerated (talk) 17:37, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That reads like a design document about how they simplified a language feature or component of their software called "Adalog". It treats "Adalog" as a software component or feature instead of an entity. It shows example features of transformations they want libadalang, an analysis tool for Ada, to do. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Searching further in their GitHub repos, according to https://github.com/AdaCore/langkit/blob/master/langkit/support/langkit_support-adalog-solver.adb, "Adalog" here is a pseudocode language made by AdaCore. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Separately, the testimony is self-published. Even if he is a subject matter expert, why should we consider this reliable? None of the presentation contents have been reviewed by others. I don't have reason to doubt Andersen's credentials, but one self-published source alone cannot establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 17:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if he is a subject matter expert, why should we consider this reliable?
WP:SELFPUB: Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not self-published, it was presented at the "Reliable Software Technologies – Ada-Europe 2017", proceedings published by Springer, see https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-60588-3 Jprosen75 (talk) 16:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this to be JP Rosen, whose connection to AdaControl is explained in this bio. They've created ~46% of the page. I've left them a COI warning. I'm tagging the article, which also contains promotional language like "gives the same level of accuracy as the language", soon. Still, I don't think that means we must delete, as these are all fixable issues. Aaron Liu (talk) 03:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD has been out for nearly a week now and most of the sources found don't really establish notability. Are we sure this article should still be kept? HyperAccelerated (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see my response above. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"gives the same level of accuracy as the language" is really about ASIS, and explains why ASIS was chosen for the tool.

Yes, I am the author of the software, and I'm willing to improve as required. Jprosen75 (talk) 15:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did your authorship have to be pointed out by another user? You need to read WP: COI. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:18, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chill it, I already sent a message about COI. Not every new user can automatically know to read all policies. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:47, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it is true, then it needs a source that states that claim in full. IMO using the same "backend" doesn't necessarily mean they have the same level of "accuracy". Aaron Liu (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WBON-LD[edit]

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

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Kentucky. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on additions made since nomination?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tan Yinglan[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Factors do not appear to have meaningfully changed since the prior discussion. He's an active businessperson, and Insignia Ventures Partners may be notable but he does not appear so as an author. Star Mississippi 01:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, and Singapore. Star Mississippi 01:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-19/singapore-s-insignia-ventures-intensifies-push-into-healthtech, https://www.ft.com/content/8c484648-f4b7-11e9-a79c-bc9acae3b654, https://www.reuters.com/technology/insignia-ventures-raises-516-mln-bets-southeast-asian-tech-firms-2022-08-01/, https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/13/insignia-venture-partners-fund-25-million-yinglan-tan/. There is also coverage in New Straits Times [16][17]. 182.190.216.63 (talk) 14:00, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of ESPNU personalities[edit]

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

This group does not have the requisite coverage in secondary sources as a group to meet the criteria established by WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 02:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Television, Sports, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 02:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to ESPNU as an WP:ATD. It serves as a WP:NAVIGATION, but there are no grouping sources for satisfying WP:LISTN. Conyo14 (talk) 18:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge to ESPNews per WP:ATD. A list that is useful being a category but not as a list, which is entirely unsourced. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unsourced and fails verification; a spot-check of articles linked (Joe Davis (sportscaster), Mike Crispino, Andy Katz) shows none of them mention ESPNU, just ESPN in general. The concept of being an "ESPNU personality" (separate from other ESPN brands) does not appear to exist. Walsh90210 (talk) 22:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I believe there was a consensus for a merge as a viable ATD, but nom's request for a relist is reasonable, so I have done so.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raquel Anderson[edit]

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a New Zealand women's rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG. A possible redirect target is New Zealand women's national rugby league team. JTtheOG (talk) 02:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Rugby league, and New Zealand. JTtheOG (talk) 02:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as I can't find any sigcov. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 07:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Piñon, Montrose County[edit]

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

Having reviewed the sources I generally rely on to determine if a Colorado place is real or formerly existed. In this case, there appears to be a location named "Piñon" in Montrose County, but it's not notable nor actually a town. No SIGCOV in RSs. Pbritti (talk) 02:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Pbritti (talk) 02:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - In a WP:BEFORE search I discovered that Pinon, Colorado was the second largest town in Montrose County, Colorado in the early 20th century, during its mining boom before it went bust. If you google it without the tilde over the first 'n' you will find a lot of hits that are significant coverage WP:SIGCOV in newspapers and books. It definitely meets WP:GNG. I've added four citations in reliable sources and expanded the article. This article on a western mining boomtown should be kept. Netherzone (talk) 04:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Netherzone: These sources seem to indicate that all material in this article should be merged to Nucla, Colorado, as the Pinon described in these sources became Nucla. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Pinon was it's own distinct town, there really is nothing between it an Nucla, which became much larger than Pinon over the years - they should be two separate articles. Netherzone (talk) 18:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep an easy WP:BEFORE search shows it qualifies for a distinct article. The book Colorado Day by Day (p. 81) suggests Piñon was the original townsite, but then settlers moved 10 miles west to found Nucla. Also covered extensively by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. SportingFlyer T·C 16:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @SportingFlyer and Netherzone: If I withdrew the AfD and moved the article to Pinon Colony, Colorado (swapping the ñ for an n but including it as a bolded alternate spelling in the lead), would that be agreeable? I think that most of the content shows this is a continuous community with Nucla (as opposed to similar colonies like South Denver), but you two disagreeing inclines me towards retaining separate articles. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  No, I don't agree with that. The content clearly shows that Pinon was a community 10 miles east of Nucla, and then was moved to Nucla after a canal was built. They are not the same place, and ghost towns are eligible for articles under NPLACE (and this passes GNG on its own as well.) Pinon Colony is not the WP:COMMONNAME and would make it more difficult for people to add sources to the article. SportingFlyer T·C 17:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- @Pbritti, I think it should remain as Pinon (not Pinon Colony) because all of the reliable newspaper and book references (many more than I added to the article) say Pinon or Piñon, and it is the official name for the town in these records and how it was known by locals in the past. @SportingFlyer is correct that Pinon is the common name. Pinon was a distinct town which is now a ghost town - a mining boomtown.
  
  BTW, I've spent time in this area on an extended photographic road trip, and went through Nucla, Natarita, Paradox, Uravan, Bedrock Slickrock, and drove through many of these tiny mining towns thruout Paradox Valley and Montrose County. Some still have derelict buildings, other were completely raised when the uranium mining boom occurred (the are is filled with vanadium). The Paradox Valley area has a fascinating history.
  The only change I would suggest is either to put "Montrose County" in parenthesis or "Montrose County, Colorado" in parentheses), but I'm not sure if that is standard formatting. If there is not another Pinon, Colorado then I think that should be the article name since that is how the other small towns or former towns mentioned above are formatted. Thank you for offering to withdrawing the AfD. Netherzone (talk) 18:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Using the sources provided, I don't think we can definitively say a. Piñon was a distinct community from Nucla (differing only in about five miles of location and sharing both the same people, government, and buildings), b. that it is a ghost town, and c. that it clears GNG. The following is a review of sources in the article:
  1. RoadsideThoughts: Not strictly an RS and certainly fails to provide SIGCOV. However, it does give us a geolocation, so best to keep it for now.
  
  2. San Miguel Basin Forum, Jan 12, 2005: This is a local newspaper publishing someone's summary of what appears to be an older self-published book and a masters dissertation. It suggests Piñon was the second-largest town in Montrose County but then describes the same community, under the auspices of the Colorado Cooperative Company, establishing themselves as Nucla.
  
  3. The Co-operator: This is a 119-year-old primary source, so caution advised. However, page 8 suggests that the Piñon site was just a temporary location for the CCC community that established Nucla–further suggesting continuity between the communities.
  
  4. San Miguel Basin Forum, October 1, 1975: Describes Pinon as a landing place for the CCC before everyone and everything moved to the Nucla site.
  
  5. San Miguel Forum, July 7, 1994: Deferring mostly to the name "Pinon Colony", the article describes the people of the CCC community moving from the Pinon site to Nucla and taking their buildings with them.
  
  6. The Denver Public Library source explicitly describes Piñon as the same community as Nucla.
  
  7. Montrose Press, July 2, 2009: This is about a geological formation known as the Piñon Ridge and has nothing to do with the community. Should be removed.
  
  An additional source can be found here from the Montrose Press (using the incorrect spelling of "Pinion"). It establishes that the CCC camp was first named "Cottonwood Camp", then Pinon, then (when everything but the cemetery moved) Nucla. These are all the same community, moved repeatedly as artificial waterways were constructed. It is akin to how Dillon moved when the Dillon Reservoir was constructed: the same community, but a different spot. Notably, Piñon does not appear in comprehensive guides to Colorado ghost towns, like Guide to Colorado Ghost Towns and Mining Camps or Ghost Towns of the Colorado Rockies. As to name, Piñon, Colorado (with no mention of the county, as no other "Piñon" exists in Colorado) would be the correct name per the conventions. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Koch Marx[edit]

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. All I found were routine transactional announcements (1, 2, 3). JTtheOG (talk) 02:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 02:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Main coverage appears to be from his time in Jersey, but I don't think there's enough for a WP:GNG pass. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luvuyo Pupuma[edit]

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

Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 02:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 02:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:09, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kirakira (video game)[edit]

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

Nothing in the article suggests this game is notable; single footnote is to some Internet radio show whose relation to the game is not even clear from the article. Metacritic has no reviews. Maybe sources exist in Japanese, but nothing useful seems to be found on ja wiki. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom. TheBritinator (talk) 13:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by Hum TV[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NLIST and is WP:NOTTVGUIDE. It has not "been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources" as references verify the shows but do not talk about the group as a whole. There are nine current programs that are sourced which can easily be placed in the Hum TV page if necessary. History of the page also shows this has been the target of socks and COI since 2017 from Hum TV. While not a reason to delete, the list only stands to promote the station. CNMall41 (talk) 18:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, Asia, Pakistan, Middle East, Europe, and United States of America. CNMall41 (talk) 18:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: detailed article about a notable network: see WP:SPLITLIST. If a merge into the main article was an improvement, I would not be opposed but it would be an issue. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a detailed article unfortunately. It is a list. If it is a problem to merge per SPLITLIST, then a redirect would work. However, it would need to be notable per NLIST to have a standalone page. I looked and could not find reliable sources that talk about the list as a grouping but I have been proven wrong before if someone can provide those sources. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would tend to believe that, whenever the list format is appropriate, a list can be a detailed page on any given subject mentioned briefly in a section of another article. The subject is obviously a subtopic of Hum TV, it would be difficult to argue otherwise. See Template Main list (which uses the word Main where "Detailed" is to be understood). See also the template For Timeline, similar. If you want to redirect and merge, sure, if all agree and size is not an issue; but this type of page is pretty standard, though, by the way. Look at the categories and the pages they contain....

For sources, you have for example, https://internationalrasd.org/journals/index.php/pjhss/article/download/1259/936/9962 ; or see Forging the Ideal Educated Girl: The Production of Desirable Subjects in Muslim South Asia (2018). But I consider WP:SPLITLIST to be the applicable section of the guideline and the fact that it's a pretty standard approach to programs of notable networks should imv encourage us to keep that list. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"I would tend to believe that, whenever the list format is appropriate, a list can be a detailed page on any given subject mentioned briefly in a section of another article" - I like that thinking and generally it seems acceptable on its face. The problem is that the list must meet notability guidelines. If not, then it should stay mentioned briefly on the notable network page. Here there are only nine programs and they do not all appear to be original programs, just current programming. I do like "a pretty standard approach to programs of notable networks" as you mentioned above. They can easily be covered by the category as opposed to standalone list (for those that are "original programmin" - the rest are just TV Guide listings) in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also concerned about the fate of borderline/mildly notable series/programs whose pages are redirected to pages like this (not about the pages themselves, but at the idea that the ATD is not an ATD). And more generally about the issue of notability of various lists like this. Allow me to quote User:Maile66's comment during a recent Afd: "Refer to Category:Lists of television series by network. Generally speaking, most of them list the programs they carry, and have no sourcing. Most of them are also kept current if programs are added or dropped. There are literally hundreds of stations involved, if not thousands of stations and programs involved. If anyone disagrees with how it's handled, I'd suggest discussing it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television." I think it's a fair concern. Either a broader discussion or a consensus that, yes, sourcing should be better but that this type of pages should generally be considered OK when the network is notable. A broader discussion would perhaps be helpful.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to the page are a concern but they should not have bearing on notability. Unfortunately, I think a lot of the programs may not meet notability guidelines but do not want to do a mass deletion. Maybe someone can take up the task and redirect them to the main station page. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: WP:NLIST applies without any special exception and that in general lists of programs, where needed, can be handled within the article about the channel, and don't generally merit a stand-alone list article, unless such a list would pass the scrutiny per WP:NLIST. WP is not a WP:NOTDIRECTORY nor WP:NOTTVGUIDE —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hum TV as WP:ATD. 2A00:23C6:139B:A101:78CA:7B5:3148:9172 (talk) 00:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep : I suggest to Keep the Article. As it a large number of notable program's are listed on it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:ad80:ab:6d1:1:0:713f:e3e2 (talk • contribs)

Arguments to avoid: WP:NOTINHERITED. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : The only difference between this list and how other station programmings are done, is that usually the list of programming is a separate section at the bottom of the article for the station itself. In this case, they simply separated the list of programming into its own article. — Maile (talk) 12:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I am wondering is if there are sources that talk about this list as a group? Otherwise, it is a TVGUIDE listing and does not meet WP:NLIST. --CNMall41 (talk) 02:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Globe, Oregon[edit]

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

Contested PROD. Non-notable location, article sourced only to GNIS and to a topographic map. Little else found. Fails WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG in absence of better sourcing. Topo maps do suggest there was once more of a settlement there than at present, but without sourcing to describe it we can't have an article. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Oregon. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zahedan Stadium[edit]

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

Merge Fails to meet WP:GNG. Should be included in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zahedan#Sports Wikilover3509 (talk) 15:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have fixed spacing in the header that broke some of the links, but have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Iran. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:01, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep AfD is not for merge requests, and I think both of the sources in the article demonstrate notability when translated. I just don't know how to do a WP:BEFORE search for this one, but stadiums of this capacity are generally notable. SportingFlyer T·C 18:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 16:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect to Zahedan#Sports no coverage for its own article. Giant Snowman 16:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Riksundar Banerjee[edit]

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

Failing all criteria of WP:NBIO, publishing articles and non notable books not fulfils WP:GNG Pinakpani (talk) 08:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject fails to meet WP:GNG as there is no in-depth coverage from independent, reliable secondary sources. However, the subject's book titled "The Book of India Ghosts" may meet WP:AUTHOR criterion number 3, which requires multiple reviews of books to establish notability. There are two reviews available for that particular book, one from The Hindu and one from The Hindu BusinessLine. Both reviews are from different publications and authors. GrabUp - Talk 18:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:BIO, WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR. The author's work has not made a significant monument, or won significant critical attention. One of his book "The book of India Ghosts", got a review from hindu.com but this cannot be considered the criteria needed to pass WP:AUTHOR because the work needs to be widely cited by peers or successors. RangersRus (talk) 15:01, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus: WP:AUTHOR’s third criterion states: “The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.” There are two reviews from The Hindu and The Hindu BusinessLine from different authors. I think this is sufficient to meet the third criteria, as multiple reviews from independent sources are available. There are other criteria, but if a subject meets any of them, then it can be presumed to be notable. GrabUp - Talk 15:35, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: This talks about the author [18]; on the balance, just enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hampton, Lane County, Oregon[edit]

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

Contested PROD. Non-notable railroad waypoint. Sources consist of 1) GNIS (does not count for notability); 2) the DeLorme atlas (likely based on GNIS); 3) a place-names gazetteer (also not sufficient for notability), and 4) the page for the Hampton Boat Launch at the Willamette National Forest USFS page, which is a page about, well, a boat launch, and not any "community" or "locale". The text of the article clearly says this is a "locale", which is not a populated place, and no other sources could be found; thus, this fails WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Oregon. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 01:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. "Could be useful" and "historical tidbit" are not policy based arguments Star Mississippi 02:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sligo Wild Geese[edit]

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

The only source since 2014 is a brief mention and I can find nothing to indicate any notability. A google search (excluding Wikipedia) find only a few hits with just a couple of brief mentions. A newspaper.com search also returns nothing. KylieTastic (talk) 11:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Ireland. KylieTastic (talk) 11:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. A relatively short-lived (local/non-profit/community) organisation that fails WP:CLUB and WP:SIGCOV. (We don't even have sources to establish the basic facts - like when the org were established/established - not to mind anything that establishes notability.) In my own WP:BEFORE, the only news sources I can find include this and this and represent represent the scarcist of trivial passing mentions in (hyper) local news sources (indicating that subject org was not even covered in any great depth in very local news coverage; Not to mind the type of [at least national] coverage that would confirm that the club's activities were "national or international in scale". As would be expected by WP:CLUB.) The only "claim to fame/notability" given in the article, about the org being "notable for many firsts, including their involvement in pioneering north–south co-operation during the beginning of the then fragile Irish peace process" represents flowery editorial and puffery that isn't supported by anything at all...) Guliolopez (talk) 11:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I was trying to de-orphan and clean this up but the sourcing doesn't seem to be there. --Here2rewrite (talk) 01:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This isn't the least sourced or most puffed stub I've seen today, or even the second, but it's close enough in spirit (per above) and the first I saw already nominated. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not a notable group. Spleodrach (talk) 06:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think with some research, the article could serve an interesting historical tidbit. --evrik ^(talk) 20:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the recent additions?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Agree with Evrik. It could be useful. I will look for more references. MaskedSinger (talk) 08:34, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:22, 8 June 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.

Attack on Mette Frederiksen[edit]

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS. Should be merged into Mette Frederiksen#Personal life and would fit perfectly there. Absolutely no need for a separate article. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Denmark. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — An attack on a current head of government hardly counts as WP:NOTNEWS. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Events. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen - WP:NOTNEWS, WP:SUSTAINED, take your pick. Yes, an attack on a current head of government can be a notable event, but...
On 7 June 2024, Frederiksen was purportedly shoved by a man in Kultorvet, Copenhagen.
Frederiksen sat down at a café after the attack.
~Adam^{(talk · contribs)} 14:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen. He wasn't really attacked, he was shoved and the sourcing reflects that. Easily covered in a sentance on the main article. Esolo5002 (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen - With all information. Clearly created at an early stage, anyways notable but not for a separate article.BabbaQ (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen per above. Uffda608 (talk) 16:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen. An egging would be more notable than this, and I doubt this would qualify for WP:10YT. Borgenland (talk) 16:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen. Not an attack really.--Catlemur (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mette Frederiksen (where incident is already covered) per above. Økonom (talk) 18:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liaoning Flying Leopards–Sichuan Blue Whales brawl[edit]

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

Neutral nom on behalf of an IP who stated: Zhanghang0704 only ever made 6 edits, all over the course of 3 days in late March 2016: the creation of this article, 4 more edits to it, and an edit to Liaoning Flying Leopards. I believe this article is a blatant violation of WP:NOTNEWS, as the brawl (which happened 5 days before this article's creation) does not appear to have sustained coverage - to say nothing of the article itself being extremely barebones despite a whopping 9 references. Star Mississippi 00:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Basketball, and China. Star Mississippi 00:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:NOTNEWS applies here with a complete lack of sustained coverage, to say nothing of the WP:NPOV issues and the fact of the article being created by a SPA. Let'srun (talk) 01:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Violates WP:NOTNEWS and hardly notable. ADifferentMan (talk) 02:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:59, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 2016 CBA Playoffs#Finals (with the history preserved under the redirect) per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. 2016 CBA Playoffs#Finals already mentions this brawl.
A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 11:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Let'srun (talk · contribs) and ADifferentMan (talk · contribs), would you support a redirect to 2016 CBA Playoffs#Finals per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion? Cunard (talk) 11:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no issues with a redirect. Let'srun (talk) 11:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saturne Party[edit]

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Visual arts, Events, Computing, and France. toweli (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. This is such a niche subject that this doesn't make sense as a standalone. — Maile (talk) 13:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

XIX International Chopin Piano Competition[edit]

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

WP:TOOSOON article about a thing there's absolutely nothing of any significance to say yet. This is still about a year and a half away, so we obviously don't know who the prize winners or even the competitors are -- literally the only thing we can say about it at this point is basic competiton rules sourced to the competition's own self-published website about itself, which is not a notability-building source.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation next year if and when there's actually reliably sourceable stuff to say about it, but we don't already need a boilerplate placeholder article to exist now. Bearcat (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Poland. Bearcat (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:55, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I have now added numerous sources and expanded the article. The competition will begin on 23 April 2025, which is less than a year. The Chopin Competition is the most important musical event in Poland and one of the most significant events in classical music. Creating an article at this point, also considering that the rules have changed considerably for this edition, which is surely of interest to the reader, seems to be justified. As more verified information becomes available closer to the event date, the article can be further expanded. I believe having a well-sourced preliminary article now is preferable to waiting until the last minute. intforce (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The time for an article about an event is not "a year out", it's "when there's substantive things to say about it beyond just 'this is a thing that will happen'". Bearcat (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Meh. This is crystallbalish but useful, and there are already some sources about the upcoming program. Yes, technically we might be justfied with dratifying this for a while, but seriously, this is make-work that is pointless. We know this event will be notable. Why waste time moving it out from mainspace and back?

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to International Chopin Piano Competition. Doesn't need a seperate article, IMO.— Iadmc ♫^talk 12:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment anything could happen to stop the competition from taking place! WP:NOTCRYSTAL. I do note that the other events have their own articles but they are full of information after the fact. Draftify is another option — Iadmc ♫^talk 12:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

anything could happen to stop the competition from taking place is not what WP:NOTCRYSTAL implies. The competition is just as likely to take place as the next Olympics or the next World Cup, all of which are events which fulfil WP:NOTCRYSTAL criteria: the event is notable, almost certain to take place, and preparations are in progress. intforce (talk) 12:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The competition is certainly notable. Previous competitions have been won by very notable performers. The fact that is going to take place all else being equal and is in preparation is not in doubt. My worry is that this is just a place holder for the event to come which is notable only for being the 100th anniversary. I still vote merge and create the article when the Competition is over — Iadmc ♫^talk 12:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep – looks like 3/4 reliable independent sources exist discussing it. Sources will only ramp up in the future. Seems useful to have a solid starting ground for a quick-moving event like this. Aza24 (talk) 18:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]