Wikipedia:XfD today

null

Speedy deletion candidates

Candidates for speedy deletion

Check Out the Event

User:Ma.Aiexia Marlvie Gregorio Caingcoy

User:MrAussieGuy/Stats

User:MrAussieGuy/Stats/Requested moves

User:Sakibur Rahman Chowdhury

Articles

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< July 05	July 07 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Iloilo National High School

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:GNG. Scoria (talk) 12:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Philippines. Scoria (talk) 12:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

F A Sumon

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:GNG. Sources are all unbylined churnalism, unreliable, or mentions. CNMall41 (talk) 20:50, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Bangladesh. CNMall41 (talk) 20:50, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – F A Sumon is a widely recognized Bangladeshi singer with multiple viral tracks and label releases. While the article still needs formatting and additional citations, his notability is evident: his music is released under major labels (G-Series, CD Choice), has over 83M+ YouTube views (e.g., "Ghum Parani Bondhu"), and has been featured on national TV and covered by major Bangladeshi media. These factors strongly support notability under WP:MUSICBIO. I'm open to improvements, but deletion is premature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SaddamHosenSaad (talk • contribs)

Please do not use AI to generate comments on Wikipedia. You state it has been significantly improved and "no longer warrants deletion" but there has been no improvement since the deletion discussion began. As far as the high-quality sourcing, can you provide links to the specific sourcing you feel shows notability? --CNMall41 (talk) 23:50, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please strike through your comments as opposed to amending them. It will throw people off as my question was specific to your original comment, not your amended one. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:52, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The references are not great (very short, almost advertorial) and the Youtube views don't convince me (how many are bot driven), at least the references are about the artist. I would say give this article a few months, look on the Bengali Wikipedia or ask some experts to clean it up and if no improvement is made, another AFD might be needed. There is a possibility that this article can improve, but in order to meet notability requirements, we have to see that the improvement can happen. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 23:53, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting !keep as an WP:ATD? If you can show WP:HEY, I would be glad to withdraw my nomination but a WP:BEFORE tells me that no amount of editing can show notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:56, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think there would need to be three to five references of a much less dubious standard for me to believe that the notability threshold is clearly met. Right now, things are kind of murky. If that can't be done in a few months, my opinion would change to a delete. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 00:17, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The references seem legitimate, although I am no expert at Bangladeshi music. I don't want to exhibit a Western bias, either. - Poof positive (talk) 04:20, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I considered nominating this when I was doing some basic cleanup on it (if you think it is bad now, you should have seen it before). I didn't bring it to AFD because albums Dorodiya,[1] Rongila Re,[2] Tor Lagi Re,[3] and Iti Tomar Priyo[4] were released on G-Series (record label). So the topic meets WP:MUSICIAN criterion #5. Most of the other things the author mentions (long career, number of albums/credits, YouTube subscribers, Facebook followers, pages on Spotify, Apple Music, etc.) have no bearing whatsoever on notability as Wikipedia defines it. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:09, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Reliable coverage by The Times of India, The Daily Star, and The Times of India demonstrate the subject's notability. Z3r0h3r000 (talk) 11:24, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Undoing my close and relisting, per request on my Talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:42, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bignay National High School

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:GNG. Scoria (talk) 12:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Philippines. Scoria (talk) 12:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luke McCormick (footballer, born 2000)

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

Fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:SIGCOV, so fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Football, and United Kingdom. UtherSRG (talk) 12:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aguinaldo International School Manila

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:GNG Scoria (talk) 12:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Philippines. Scoria (talk) 12:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kamboja Rajput

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

WP:POVFORK of Kambojas/Kamboj (trying to connect the latter to the former). Covered by WP:CASTE sanctions. Stunning WP:HOAXing of sources (that is why no links and URLs are given), here is what you find when you go to verify them: Puri makes no mention of Rajput/Kamboja in his entire book; Stein makes no mention of Kamboja in his book; Dirks again makes no mention of Kambojas; the same is the case with Thapar (have the copy); Yadav again makes no mention of Kambojas (also a non-RS); the Witzel source doesn't exist (no such publication by him); Raychaudhuri makes no connection between Kambojas/Rajputs; cannot verify The People of India but the source itself is non-RS (largely covered by WP:RAJ). Considering the formatting of the references and the content itself would not be surprised if LLM was used or if the content was lifted from dubious caste-based websites. Gotitbro (talk) 12:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, History, Hinduism, Pakistan, India, and Punjab. Gotitbro (talk) 12:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mario (Austrian TV series)

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

No refs on the page for many years. Nothing on de.wiki either. Interested to see if anyone else can offer sources that meet the notability standards for inclusion JMWt (talk) 09:18, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Austria. JMWt (talk) 09:18, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:09, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

100 greatest

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

This is not a valid disambiguation page, and it inhibits Search. It is a list of WP:Partial title matches and other entries. If deleted, also move 100 Greatest (TV series) to the base name. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:11, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:11, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:01, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agreed, this page blocks the search function, and I suspect there are far more "100 greatest" articles than are reflected in this list of random topics. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:49, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khong Lanmi

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

Non-notable infantry, does not need a separate article. Can be best described at Lanmi (Meitei culture). Wareon (talk) 10:43, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, India, and Manipur. Shellwood (talk) 11:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article already presents a substantial amount of in-depth information that supports its notability. If the nominator believes it does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, I would appreciate more specific reasoning grounded in those policies. Simply suggesting it be merged into a broader topic isn't sufficient if the subject is independently notable and the content supports a stand-alone article. Haoreima (talk) 11:35, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Regardless of the explanation above, notability still cannot be established. Agletarang (talk) 16:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discussion of sourcing would help focus notability discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:00, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of In the Night Garden... characters

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

Do we really need a separate article for all the characters of an already pretty obscure show? Sure, there's precedent for articles like this when the show is both immensely popular and has a lot of main characters. But here, the show in question (In the Night Garden...) is not that well known (so is definitely going to have some sourcing issues regarding the show's content itself) and the number of main characters is lower than some other articles on cartoon shows that don't have a separate page for characters. As an example, see Oddbods. It has 7 main characters (8 counting the newly introduced one). While In the Night Garden... has 5 main characters, yet Oddbods doesn't have a separate page for its characters. The sourcing is terrible too, basically a big mess of WP:OR violations with only one source. This article shouldn't exist and would be a whole lot better if merged with In the Night Garden... While there's a lot of minor characters, so does basically every other show? Does a one-time character appearing only in a single episode but playing a major role in that specific episode count as a minor character? What's the threshold here? Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 11:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support: this article has had multiple issues for quite a long time, and has been a common source of vandalism. The chances of the aforementioned issues being resolved in the future seems very unlikely. Signed, SleepyRedHair. (talk - contribs) 12:37, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delta Air Lines v. Crowdstrike

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

We already have an article on the 2024 Delta Air Lines disruption. I don't think that this lawsuit is independently notable. Avgeekamfot (talk) 11:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Aviation, Computing, and United States of America. Avgeekamfot (talk) 11:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Romansh exonyms

AfDs for this article:

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

I searched but could not find enough good sources to show notability. No cites have been added since last year’s deletion discussion. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 09:50, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luxembourgish exonyms

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

Previous deletion discussion was not specific to this article. We don’t know whether AI which read this article take into account that it is unsourced, therefore rather than spreading possible misinformation it would be better to delete it. Because not all AI say they got their info from Wikipedia Chidgk1 (talk) 09:40, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Luxembourg. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:40, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Dresden stabbing

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

Routine stabbing which killed 1 person, fails WP:GNG. After the perpetrator was sentenced, the coverage fully stopped. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Germany. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Terrorism. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian exonyms

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

Previous deletion discussions were not specifically about this article. Discussion on the talk page shows this article may be misinformation or disinformation. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Croatia. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:52, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's plenty of scholarly discussion on the subject, it just needs to be sourced. [5] [6] [7] [8] and this notes Croatian exonyms are not necessarily consistent, so I don't necessarily think the "disinformation" tag is correct. SportingFlyer T·C 11:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P. Vietti

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

Footballer that fails WP:GNG. I was not able to find any significant coverage about him. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:24, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Switzerland. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:24, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:51, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarian exonyms

AfDs for this article:

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

The link given in last year’s deletion discussion does not mention Bulgaria and no cites have been added to this article. In general articles should have at least 2 cites Chidgk1 (talk) 09:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Bulgaria. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:49, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Catch (brand)

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

Catch seems to be one of the brands of Dharampal Satyapal Group. This article openly contains promotional texts of it that are being presented as an encyclopedic entry, which goes against WP:NOT, particularly WP:NOTADVERT and WP:ADMASQ, ofcourse. Even if we suggest a merge with the company article as a WP:ATD option, it still doesn't make much sense to move promo text from one page to another. A couple of lines about it already exist in the history section. Charlie (talk) 06:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Charlie (talk) 06:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:01, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The citations presented are OK and will pass notability guidelines. In particular, the articles in The Hindu Business Line, Business Standard, and Financial Express provide significant independent coverage. Yolandagonzales (talk) 06:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All the articles are meant to promote the subject, and the last one from Financial Express was written by their BrandWagon team. Please visit and read WP:RSNOI. Charlie (talk) 11:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 07:09, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sacha Dragic

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

Unclear notability. Current sources appear routine and more focused on this person's company than him. I am not sure that he meets notability guidelines as a WP:BUSINESSPERSON. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 00:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, France, Romania, and Serbia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this article meets Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines. Sacha Dragic has received significant and sustained coverage in multiple reliable, secondary sources that discuss him in-depth and independently of any Superbet promotional material.

For example:

– Sacha Dragic returns to the helm as co-CEO: https://igamingbusiness.com/people/sacha-dragic-superbet/

– Sacha Dragic enters the insurance market: https://www.profit.ro/stiri/confirmare-sacha-dragic-fondatorul-superbet-intra-pe-piata-asigurarilor-20952276

– Gaming Intelligence: Superbet founder Sacha Dragic returns as co-CEO: https://www.gamingintelligence.com/people/moves/201438-superbet-founder-sacha-dragic-to-return-as-co-ceo/

These are a few links that are cited in the current Wikipedia article; there are more sources online, but I started with the ones that are already present here and talk about Sacha Dragic as a well-known entrepreneur, not just as Superbet CEO. I believe the links I listed above are not trivial mentions; they demonstrate that he is a notable figure in both Romanian business and the international gaming sector.

Based on the standard outlined at WP:GNG, I recommend that we keep the article. Vaderthedarklab (talk) 11:02, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:37, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For more community input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 07:03, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sho Nogami

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

Not meet WP:NBOX HumanRight 02:43, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sport of athletics-related deletion discussions. HumanRight 02:43, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why was this listed in sport of athletics? LibStar (talk) 06:25, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:11, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:11, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Boxing-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:11, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment NBOX doesn't mean squat. Wayne Gretzky fails WP:NHOCKEY. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 07:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete My search didn't turn up the significant independent coverage to meet WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO, nor does the subject meet the relevant SNG. I admittedly don't read Japanese, so please let me know if significant supporting evidence is added. Papaursa (talk) 09:50, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:32, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For more community input
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 07:02, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudo-secularism

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

Non-notable term not used by anybody except Sangh Parivar and their supporters. The article on Sangh Parivar can include some details about this topic but a separate article is not really needed. Capitals00 (talk) 10:30, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:32, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - are we a soapbox now? Bearian (talk) 02:18, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Expand and globalize this article. Great achievement (talk) 06:48, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Globalization is not possible because this is a neologism used in Indian politics. Outside of India, no one is using it. 103.198.133.241 (talk) 10:53, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - While the article claims that BJP has a problem with "pseudo secularism", they actually have problem with secularism as a whole.[9] That said, the article does come off as a soapbox. THEZDRX _{(User) |}_(Contact) 12:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are 'Find sources' links above - use them.
- 1000+ results on Google Scholar with -wikipedia filter, after excluding variants such as 'pseudo-secular' and 'pseudo-secularist'.
- 100+ books on Google Books, excluding Wikipedia-based / AI-generated content. Some books that cannot be simply dismissed as trivial mentions:
  - The Crisis of Secularism in India, Duke University
  - The Secular Imaginary: Gandhi, Nehru and the Idea(s) of India, Cambridge University Press
  - This excludes the entire books written by people who will be dismissed as Sangh Parivar supporters: Pseudo-secularism in India, Pseudo-secularism, Christian Missions, and Hindu Resistance etc
- Let's not even talk about literally thousands of news articles, because they will be dismissed as instances of the term being used by 'Sangh Parivar and their supporters'. Never mind that articles such as Trads or Manuvadi - which these 'Delete' voters will gladly defend - are also based on news articles.
- That brings us to another point. Does the General notability guideline WP:GNG include any stipulation that a term should be used by a wider range of people to be notable? Sangh Parivar and their supporters easily number over 100 million with BJP alone claiming to have 170 million members). Category:Ethnic and religious slurs has over 200 terms that are used by much smaller groups.
- Even if there such a stipulation existed, the article would easily pass notability:
  - Religious Revival and Pseudo-Secularism, article in Cardozo Law Review journal, nothing to do with Sangh Parivar
  - Epistemic Violence and the Rise of the Pseudo-Secular Islamic FBO in the Age of the ‘Religious Turn’ in Development, article in Muslim World journal, Deakin University
  - The Sources of Secularism: Enlightenment and Beyond (Springer) extensively discusses pseudo-secularism in the Middle East (quote for example "the reign and fall of pseudo-secularism is the most striking similarity between Iran, Turkey, and Tunisia")
  - Dominating religion in Egypt's pseudo-secular state, ABC Australia
  - A Pseudo-Secular Space, Religious Minority and Reasons for Exclusion: The Ahmadiyya Minority Group in Contemporary Indonesia, Politics and Religion Journal
  - This excludes news articles about Sangh Parivar opponents accusing them of being pseudo-secular, for example, Who’s pseudo-secular now? Sure, Yogi Adityanath, do build a Ram statue – but with your own money or Has the BJP become pseudo-secular?
  - This also excludes news articles about BJP opponents accusing other BJP opponents of being pseudo-secular, for example, Cong leaders term JD(S) pseudo secular or Lalu is pseudo-secular: Congress
- The "article is a soapbox" arguments boil down to WP:IDONTLIKEIT - no attempt to initiate a discussion on the talk page or use maintenance tags on an article that has 18+ sources in References section and four books in Further reading section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:5943:3700:E0C7:A57C:181C:931 (talk) 03:56, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None of these sources provide significant coverage to the neologism in hand. I note you are using Hindutva publications,[10][11] and opinion pieces.[12][13] They are not WP:RS. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but you have extremely poor comprehension skills.
- For what you call "Hindutva publications", I mentioned "This excludes the entire books... such as"
- For what you call "opinion pieces", I mentioned "This excludes news articles...."
- "None of these sources provide significant coverage"? Really? I get it that you may not have the time to read the books published by Duke University or Cambridge University Press, but there are two journal articles with literally the term "pseudo-secularism" in their title. 2607:FEA8:5943:3700:100:D940:36E1:D661 (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None of the sources cited by you provide any significant coverage to this Hindu nationalist invented neologism. The first book does not concern this neologism at all. The second mentions it but only stating that it is an attack used by hindu nationalists "In contemporary Indian politics, it is this idea of protection of minorities through constitutional and cultural safeguards which has been increasingly attacked by the Hindu right as ‘pseudo-secular’" [14]. The rest of the books you have cited are written by Hindutva ideologues who have a vested political interest in promoting this term as noted by me. The rest of your sources do not describe or provide any significant coverage to this term. The usage of this term by hindutva politicians as a polemic does not contribute towards notability as none of these sources describe it in depth. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 05:02, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:SOAP. Non-notable political neologism, serves no purpose other than making Wikipedia a soapbox. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How does a "non-notable neologism" happen to have so many results on JSTOR? 183 results for "pseudo-secularism", 147 results for Pseudo-secular, 27 results for "pseudo-secularist"... with journal articles dating back to 1990s?

1991 journal article: "all others were either communal or pseudo-secular"
1993 journal article: "Any dissent runs the risk of being branded as pseudo-secular appeasement."
1994 journal article: "In either case, allegations that the state is pseudo-secular are entirely misplaced."
1994 journal article: "The term 'communal', in this twisted language, is reserved for the Muslim, whereas the 'pseudo-secular' is the Hindu who defends the right of the Muslim citizen."
1994 journal article: "Post-independence Congress governments are labelled 'pseudo-secular', and accused of pandering to the 'minorities'."

cf. Trads (Hindu nationalism) (1 result from 2024) or Manuvadi (4 results for Manuvada, 33 results for Manuvadi) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:5943:3700:100:D940:36E1:D661 (talk) 19:24, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None of these sources treat it as a notable concept. They only treat it as a part of Hindutva politics. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 05:02, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per analysis of sources above. Non-notable neologism. CharlesWain (talk) 10:52, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep' passes WP:GNG and per Google Scholar.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:42, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It's hard to see how consensus may be achieved, but let's try.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Youssef El Deeb

AfDs for this article:

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

Was nominated for deletion by Bearcat, part of their rationale was, "WP:BLP of a media entrepreneur, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for media figures. As always, founders of television channels are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on their sourceability -- but this is referenced entirely to a mixture of primary sources and glancing namechecks of the subject's existence in coverage about other things, with no evidence shown at all of any GNG-worthy coverage with him as its subject." Although re-written, this still applies. The second part of Bearcat's rationale dealt with COI editing, which has only been exacerbated by the most recent edits of a blatant COI/UPE editor. I also agree with Bearian's assessment in the prior AfD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Egypt, and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 11:48, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – This subject meets the criteria of WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Youssef El Deeb is not simply a "founder"; he is a significant media figure in the Arab world. His creation of Fatafeat TV — later acquired by Discovery — is a landmark event in Arab media, widely covered in **independent** and **reliable** sources such as *Deadline*, *The Hollywood Reporter*, and *BroadcastPro ME* (not primary or promotional outlets).
He also held senior executive roles at MBC and Rotana, and his creative work in film and TV has been recognized with awards — further reinforcing his notability under WP:CREATIVE and WP:ENT.
The current version of the article uses multiple **independent** and **significant** sources that focus on El Deeb himself, not just passing mentions. This satisfies the sourcing standard under GNG.
The deletion rationale cites past versions, but the article has been substantially rewritten and resourced. The presence of COI/UPE concerns is not, in itself, grounds for deletion — per WP:NOTCLEAN, what matters is whether the article **now** meets policy. It does.
Editors are welcome to continue improving neutrality or trimming promotional tone, but deletion would discard verifiable coverage of a genuinely notable figure in Arab media.

~~~~ Vlodiker Chimok (talk) 11:50, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer: the above reply is LLM-generated and the arguments within likely unsound. The formatting and tone are typical of LLM use, and there is even an obvious hallucination in the form of the non-existent WP:NOTCLEAN. I would normally collapse such comments per WP:AITALK, but do not wish to interfere with their vote. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 12:48, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - the above editor is either a COI or UPE editor.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:42, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't an accusation you should make without evidence, and goes against good-faith discussion. Ike Lek (talk) 06:38, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. While this is a reliable source, I had to scroll through all 7 paragraphs and multiple ads to find the producer mentioned as a literal afterthought. The rest of the sources are less than reliable or more passing mentions. There's a myth about producers that they are rare, creative performers of some kind. They're business people; some are notable, most are not. I feel I have to repeat myself that we are not LinkedIn. Bearian (talk) 15:13, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Only passing mentions from press releases. Highly promotional. WP is not LinkedIn. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 16:07, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*:* Keep – The deletion arguments rely on outdated or incorrect information. Youssef El Deeb is a notable figure in Arab media, having founded Fatafeat TV, sold to Discovery, and produced award-winning films. Multiple independent, reliable sources focus specifically on him.Preceding !vote struck as duplicate !vote. Leaving the rest as comments.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- Claims of promotional tone or COI editing do not justify deletion. If there are issues, they should be fixed by neutral editing, not removal.
- The this is not Linkedin argument ignores real-world impact and reliable coverage. Deletion would erase a notable media personality with clear public recognition.
- Please evaluate the article based on verifiable facts and reliable sources, not on assumptions or editor speculation.
Vlodiker Chimok (talk) 16:44, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Cannot find significant coverage of the subject in independent reliable sources, fails WP:NBASIC. Concerning arguments about which properties the subject has been involved in, to quote from WP:INHERITORG: "An organization may be notable, but individual members (or groups of members) do not "inherit" notability due to their membership." Notability is not inherited here, and is not established otherwise. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 12:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Transformer effect

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

Mutual inductance and Inductive coupling already have much more information here. The transformer effect certainly is not the WP:COMMONNAME for this, either. DeemDeem52 (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Engineering, and Technology. DeemDeem52 (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Physics, Ldm1954 (talk) 00:45, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not delete - what are you suggesting should happen? Christian75 (talk) 12:23, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the nom that the term is rarely used. It refers to the effect in which an emf is induced by a time-varying magnetic field. (see [15] and [16]). It is usually discussed in electrodynamics textbooks under the topic Faraday's law of induction. Given this, I propose that we merge to Faraday's law of induction, and create a redirect from the more common term, transformer emf, to that page. The coverage at the target article should also be expanded. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 17:36, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added discussion about transformer emf to Faraday's law of induction. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 16:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as suggested. Bearian (talk) 09:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Transformer. There is nothing useful in this article to merge, it is high-school physics without sources. The name is not in common use, and I suspect is a literal translation from another language. It seems to have been created much earlier in WP history when the policy about what to include and verification was more open. I would also be OK with a simple delete, as a Google search mainly brings up pages on Transformer-syle robots. Ldm1954 (talk) 09:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Transformer, as there is not any brilliant prose or even cited content worth preserving via merge. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 17:31, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Technically, transformer seems like a wrong target. In those sources that care to define "transformer effect", e.g. this, it includes any effect from changing magnetic flux to a stationary circuit, similar to transformer emf. In particular, it includes the interaction between a circuit and a moving magnet, which is unrelated to what happens in a transformer. That's why I suggested Faraday's law of induction above. If we decide that it generally does not have a well-defined meaning, then we should delete it or link to Electromagnetic induction, which is the broadest article in the topic area. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 18:05, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would be fine with either of those as redirect destinations. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 23:31, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Inductance#Mutual inductance, where Mutual induction also redirects. In 2006 the first sentence of the first version of this article read The Transformer Effect, or Mutual Induction, describes one of the processes by which an electromotive force (e.m.f.) is induced. So it was meant as an article on what we usually refer to as mutual induction. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:45, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Destinyokhiria 💬

12:53, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on Mutual inductance: The original intent of the author of the WP article does not matter, especially when the assertion that "transformer effect" is synonymous with mutual induction is unsourced. It is more important how the term is used in the literature. L.V. Kite (1974) An introduction to linear electric circuits discusses mutual inductance and says The phenomenon we have discussed here is the is the transformer effect. It occurs in circuits which are fixed in position, and should not be confused with the related phenomenon known as the dynamo effect, which depends for its existence on relative motion. This does not yet tell us whether he considers transformer effect synonymous with mutual inductance or whether it is more general phenomenon. However, he also says later that self induction [...] is obviously an additional manifestation of transformer effect. Here's another source that considers self-inductance in connection with the transformer effect: [17]. This indicates that Mutual inductance is a narrower concept than the transformer effect. Anyway, this is such a niche term that I am not strongly opposed to Mutual inductance as a target if it helps closing the AfD, since mutual inductance does lead the reader to the general topic area. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 07:47, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of McDonnell Douglas MD-80 operators

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

Article had only two citations, both of which were unreliable sources per WP:PLANESPOTTERS. Only reason I didn't remove the second citation was because I didn't spot it. So in essence, this list article, which contains details such as numbers of aircraft in operation or formerly in operation, is completely unsourced, with the only assistance for the reader being to go to the linked articles - which doesn't count as sourcing per WP:CIRCULAR Danners430 (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Lists. Danners430 (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you also have Airfleets [18], and at least SimpleFlying and BusinessInsider blog posts showing which airlines operate the plane: [19] [20] So it's not really a trivial/NLIST failing topic if we can agree on a proper source. There may be more in my old books in storage as well. SportingFlyer T·C 11:54, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Airfleets has been in multiple RSNs over the years where it's also been listed as unreliable, as it's basically the same as Planespotters. Simple Flying is a deprecated source, but Business Insider would work. If we can find sources, then obviously there's no problem keeping the article... unfortunately, often it takes an AfD for such action to take place!

And for the record, yes I did make a quick search for sources myself... but as I'm not really an aviation-inclined person, I couldn't find anything substantial. Danners430 (talk) 11:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are at least three books directly on the planes published at various times, but I can't access their insides. SportingFlyer T·C 12:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think if we're wanting to source current lists of operators and numbers though we probably need more recent sources Danners430 (talk) 12:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Very few operators still fly this plane. SportingFlyer T·C 17:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simple Flying is NOT a reliable source WP:SIMPLEFLYING Protoeus (talk) 23:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - needing improvement (i.e. reliable references) is never a reason to delete an article. Fully referencing the list is something that should be achievable. Mjroots (talk) 09:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes opening an AfD is the only way to get an article improved... Like I said above, I've done a search for sources, but haven't been able to find anything substantial. Danners430 (talk) 09:38, 23 June 2025 (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! 09:35, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep We can clearly source American operators from my source search. See [21] [22] We can also source other carriers - I picked two at random and there's lots out there, but nothing that is a clear "slam dunk" (like say the BBC) because this is a niche topic with niche sources. I do not know what is in this book. This looks self-published unfortunately. The problem is we can absolutely source this and it's encyclopedic but there's not going to be one source out there that isn't a niche aviation source... SportingFlyer T·C 10:14, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Investopia

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

There is nothing to indicate that the subject is notable. This is a UAE government program created in 2021. There is no independent reliable news coverage of this program. The coverage is solely by news outlets that are propaganda outlets for the UAE government or are prohibited from reporting in any critical or nuanced way on this government program. Thenightaway (talk) 15:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Arab Emirates. Shellwood (talk) 15:41, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep and improve - Based on global reach and influence as well as participation by notable individuals. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 17:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- What about this program that has existed since 2021 indicates that it has "global reach" and "influence"? There is certainly nothing in this article, which is written like an advertisement, that suggests any such thing. If it's so influential and has such global reach, where is the RS coverage on this organization? Paying notable people to give a speech at a conference does not make the conference notable. Thenightaway (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:37, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep enough sources to meet GNG and SIGCOV. Many might not be traditional big name western "reliable sources", but that has never been a requirement. A global encyclopedia benefits from this type of article and these types of sources. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:26, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Multiple reliable, independent sources cover Investopia beyond the organization’s site such as (WAM), (Ministry of Economy), and (Deutsche Bank). Meets GNG and SIGCOV. Yolandagonzales (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those sources are neither reliable nor independent of the subject. Thenightaway (talk) 16:50, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with Nominator that I don't see independent, reliable sources to pass WP:GNG. The online sources I found read more like press releases than independent coverage: Economy Middle East, One Arabia, Aletihad. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 06:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jax Fox

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

I don't see how this article meets notability requirements. Aside from them being the first transgender politician (which is now quite common in Tasmania) the article doesn't have much significant information that would warrant being an article on its own. It also heavily relies on primary sources. DeadlyRampage26 (Chat) 11:26, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Politicians. DeadlyRampage26 (Chat) 11:26, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 11:47, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 06:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Might this deletion request have anything to do with the "Distaste for the Greens" you have in your userpage infobox? Lord Beesus (talk) 13:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An editor's personal opinions are not to be considered in deletion discussions. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 14:38, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: From the article is [23] and [24]. Other secondary sources from the article only have passing mentions. However news searches easily find [25], [26], [27], [28]. Most of the sources I found are behind paywalls. Given that Fox is the subject of the reporting, I'd find it hard to imagine them not containing significant coverage of them. TarnishedPath^talk 10:33, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Jax Fox has significant media coverage outside of being the first transgender Tasmanian politician. The fact that there are now other transgender officeholder in Tasmania is not an argument against notability based on being first. It's also very odd to claim "quite common" when it's literally only one other local politician who's transgender (note the other example is a trans woman rather than a non-binary person so it's not even another example of the same kind of person).

Additionally, outside of personal life stuff, sources are almost entirely secondary. There are also a bunch of other secondary sources and noteworthy entries that have only not yet been added to the page, largely because they're behind a paywall which makes them annoying to add in, but they will eventually get added. Lord Beesus (talk) 13:57, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lord Beesus, I suggest you check out ProQuest which is available through the Wikipedia Library for articles which might be behind a paywall. It looks like you have the editing requirements to access it. TarnishedPath^talk 14:02, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I searched through ProQuest and I am conflicted. The subject regularly received coverage in the local newspaper (The Mercury), and a few articles produce significant coverage like this one (the website is "realestate.com.au" but the news coverage comes from The Mercury. Unfortunately, there are not many other sources that go deeply beyond a quote or an event. This is a short mention by ABC. The Australian has two mentions that are quotes or short reports.

There is enough material to write an article based on what the subject's tenure on Hobart City Council. However, I'm not entirely convinced that the subject has enough sources to meet WP:GNG. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 09:11, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asia Market Wrap

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

Article unreferenced for nearly 20 years, lacks WP:SIGCOV. Previously bundled with Market Wrap, which was then blared in 2023, and European Closing Bell. Coeusin (talk) 12:17, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Finance, Economics, and Asia. Coeusin (talk) 12:17, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning redirect to CNBC (as there currently is no Market Wrap to redirect to). Added some facts and references, as there was no mention of any WP:BEFORE search, but it is mainly passing mentions (though my search was cursory at best; Wikipedia Library/EBSCOhost and Internet Archive). Please ping me if additional sources are found. Cielquiparle (talk) 22:41, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to CNBC Asia#Former programmes: it is listed there, which makes it a more appropriate target for an alternative for deletion than the main CNBC article (which does not go into detail about what is shown on the Asian version; this show was only ever early-morning filler on the US version). It's not exactly as if there's much to say about a business news program that undoubtedly resembles so many others. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For the record: the bundled nomination mentioned by the current nominator was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Market Wrap. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vera Cherepanova

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

Fails WP:NBIO. Not supported by reliable and significant sources. More than half of the current sources ([29][30][31][32][33][34]) are primary. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 12:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, and ~~United Arab Emirates~~. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 12:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I draftified the page but the author moved it back to mainspace without improvement. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 12:54, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not sure about any connection to the UAE? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:02, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. I meant the United States. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:06, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oho! Makes more sense. In any case, I don't think she passes WP:GNG, so Delete Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:48, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 13:08, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:33, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note I have a google alert for my name and Mrs. Cherepanova's name - we authored a case together in 2020. The case study received a few awards, including Outstanding New Case Writer - https://www.thecasecentre.org/AwardsComps/winners/year/2020

I know that Vera has a number of other awards and honours but they are industry-specific, e.g. she was named best compliance officer by IBLF / E&Y in 2011 - http://iblfrussia.org/news/detail.php?ID=566

I don't think the article needs to be deleted, but in current form it definitely doesn't reflect Mrs. Cherepanova's achievements and overall impact the made in the EU & US compliance industry.

Needs more work. Normalnot (talk) 09:13, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Normalnot. How did you get a Google alert? Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 10:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fancy Refrigerator I have google alerts https://www.google.com/alerts set up for a number of keywords. The one that fired was for this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red - through which I found this discussion. All that said, given my connection to Mrs. Cherepanova I'm probably in violation of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COIE and shouldn't be part of this discussion. Normalnot (talk) 11:10, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please follow WP:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI to make a conflict of interest disclosure. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 11:26, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:27, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dice Ailes

AfDs for this article:

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

This article fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. The sources are mostly shallow entertainment blogs, interviews, and promo-style coverage; nothing that qualifies as significant, independent reporting. There’s no major chart success, no major awards, and no in-depth analysis from reliable media. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 13:12, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Nigeria. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 13:12, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:19, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'm seeing low quality sources that are obviously paid publicity. For instance, the two Vanguard sources have no named author. Same with PM News and BellaNaija. The nomination for an award at the Headies is only for the expectant category of "Next Rated" which is a prediction of which up-and-coming act might become the big thing in global hip-hop. Combined with the long history of promotional edits in the article, I don't think this article serves the Wikipedia reader. Binksternet (talk) 18:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep as he does have an AllMusic staff written bio here which is unusual for Nigerian artists, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:31, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: AllMusic and RhythmOne are not considered as generally reliable sources, see here: [35] m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 22:47, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's listed as reliable at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources here apart from the genres sidebar, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:47, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - AllMusic prose reviews signed by a music critic are reliable. That means we have one solid source. Binksternet (talk) 21:02, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:26, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

General Aviation Inc. Flight 115

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

Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, United States of America, and Tennessee. XYZ1233212 (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak keep~~ Delete or draftify: This article is written in a way that makes it a bit more difficult to comprehend. I think a copyedit may be necessary. There is also a citation error. (These issues can be fixed relatively quickly). I think ~~keeping the article or~~ returning to draft as an WP:ATD to fix these issues and finding more sources would be good. Failing that, deletion. 11WB (talk) 20:16, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re-signed my vote comment above to reflect my edited update from the conversation below. 11WB (talk) 20:17, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Selectively merge the article's content and reliable references to Nashville International Airport § Accidents and incidents as WP:ATD (although already mentioned at the target): This is a WP:ROUTINE aviation accident lacking WP:LASTING effects; attempted WP:BEFORE search for sources with WP:SIGCOV has gone nowhere. EditorGirlAL07 (talk) 11:32, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is there are literally no reliable sources available to cite for this accident. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:10, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~:Weak Keep It is not a medium size aircraft and just because it has only 2 fatalities doesn't mean it can't be notable. I found this website talking about it in 2016. ~~

~~https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/maybe-someone-can-learn-something-from-this.96151/~~

~~However, I will admit I can't find many sources, so if someone can make a good response then I will change my vote to delete. Zaptain United (talk) 16:12, 29 June 2025 (UTC)~~[reply]

I agree for the most part on the notability. For the actual way it is written/formatted however, I believe a rewrite or many corrections are necessary (capitalization, spacing etc). I chose draftify for this and to find more sources. 11WB (talk) 19:35, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should choose weak keep as draftify could lead to this article just being deleted since the other editor voted delete. We could still improve this article without needing to make it a draft. Zaptain United (talk) 20:08, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you make a good point there. I prefer to vote for keeping an article if it can be improved and is notable, which I think this one could be. I'll make weak keep my primary choice and draft as an WP:ATD. 11WB (talk) 20:14, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. None of the sources are appropriate - (1) is a Reddit thread(!), (2) is a Youtube video, (3) appears to be a WP:SPS, (4) is another Youtube video, and (5) is a transcript of the cockpit voice recorder, which is a primary source and confers no notability. And searching for information on this accident turns up no other content, either for "General Aviation Inc. Flight 115" or "General Aviation Flight 115". I'd ordinarily suggest a redirect to the airport's accidents-and-incidents section as suggested by EditorGirlAL07 above, but there are literally no reliable sources with which to cite it if it was there. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:10, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Changing to Redirect to Nashville International Airport#Accidents and incidents, as it's appropriately sourced there and thanks to GLL for finding additional sources. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:41, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No WP:SIGCOV, and fails WP:EVENTCRIT #4. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:57, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT – Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. [Newspapers.com search results] No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:20, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I initially voted draftify. However, upon seeing recent edits made to the article in regards to WP:CVIO, along with the questionable references, I am less inclined to keeping the article. 11WB (talk) 11:45, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I change my vote to delete. After reading all the responses, I am crossing out my previous vote and changing it to delete. This is not notable at all. Zaptain United (talk) 13:03, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the above. I still think the article could be improved if returned to draft with better sources, however I'm unsure notability is strong enough to warrant its own article in this case. 11WB (talk) 14:42, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Nashville International Airport#Accidents and incidents. It's already mentioned there and sourced, though if any RS can be found the entry there could be expanded to include operator and flight number. Either way, this incident does not appear to have had the requisite lasting SIGCOV necessary for its own article. nf utvol (talk) 19:27, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Newspaper results from UPI and the AP from the time are enough to confirm that this thing happened [36] [37], and so a brief mention in the accidents and incidents section is appropriate. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 09:24, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Nashville International Airport#Accidents and incidents as an alternative to deletion. Note that WP:BEFORE requires consideration of alternatives to deletion (WP:ATD. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 18:43, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:26, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Telangana Gaddar Film Awards of 2024

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

Fails WP:GNG. Unreliable sources, mentions of winners, but nothing in-depth about the year itself. Even the main award page is likely not notable. Apparently, I do not have permission to redirect as an WP:ATD so here we are. CNMall41 (talk) 16:58, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 16:59, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:30, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep It is linked to notable article of Telangana Gaddar Film Awards the 1st ediiton, stop your non sense. I dont understand why you editors waste time of yours and others by nominating every new article for deletion. Stop your non sense going forward. It is common sense if academy awards are notable, the 1st edition is notable. Dont you have common sense. The article is widely covered by all media houses and it is highly notable than academy awards.Sukshmadarshinisrilanka (talk) 07:45, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is linked to notable article of Telangana Gaddar Film Awards the 1st ediiton, stop your non sense. I dont understand why you editors waste time of yours and others by nominating every new article for deletion. Stop your non sense going forward. It is common sense if academy awards are notable, the 1st edition is notable. Dont you have common sense. The article is widely covered by all media houses and it is highly notable than academy awards. Sukshmadarshinisrilanka (talk) 07:46, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First, I would ask that you read WP:CIVIL. After that, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID and make the appropriate disclosure if applicable. As far as the main award, I do not believe it is notable so I will be recommending that for deletion as well. As far as this page, I do not see anything in your argument showing how it is notable. Being linked to another page does not show notability (see WP:WALLEDGARDEN). Can you provide the reliable sources you feel show notability? --CNMall41 (talk) 18:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Who are you to decide it is not notable I am asking? Are you from Telangana state of India? In what way you decide that it is not notable when you dont understand its film culture, state, country and geography ? There are already tons of sources I cited and it is widely covered by all media houses. A street beggar in Hyderabad knows about these awards. Sukshmadarshinisrilanka (talk) 09:36, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article meets WP:GNG and WP:NEVENT due to significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, including Times Now, Deccan Herald, and Deccan Chronicle, which detail the 2024 ceremony, winners, and controversies. Charliehdb (talk) 12:28, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then how is this not WP:COAT if it is already covered at the main event page? Also, which part of NEVENT covers organized events? Will take a closer look prior to opining. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:53, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NEVENT? Sukshmadarshinisrilanka (talk) 07:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:26, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jun Kokubo

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

Unsourced article by a player who only have spells at teams in J League 2 and below in the Japanese league system. Svartner (talk) 17:28, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Svartner (talk) 17:28, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. 108 games in the J2 League, that's a quite different calibre from the junk we have deleted the past year. A thorough WP:JAPANBEFORE (as coined by @Miminity) is needed. Geschichte (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 11:23, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability - but agree with Geschichte that there could/should be coverage out there. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:27, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you agree that there could/should be coverage that exists, shouldn't that justify keeping it under WP:NPOSSIBLE? Ike Lek (talk) 22:01, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wael Al-Masri

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

promotional article. فيصل (talk) 04:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Jordan. فيصل (talk) 04:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete Given that an administrator of Arabic Wikipedia believes that notability outside of promotional material has not been established, I am inclined to agree. I cannot validate sourcing in English to any degree that shows notability, and it would require a lot of cleanup to get this page in working order. Nonetheless, I think it could Return to Draftspace. PickleG13 (talk) 04:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:10, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: this guy is notable. The article itself definitely needs some work, but the subject himself meets WP:GNG based on the sourcing in the article and elsewhere. [38] [39] [40]. Cremastra (talk) 22:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cremastra: Citation 2 and 3 are both to middleeastarchitect.com, and therefore not independent of each other. Is there a third independent source to establish notability? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:40, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Femke: It was my understanding that WP:GNG requires multiple, reliable, secondary sources which are independent of the subject. Since the magazine seems to be independent of the subject, I don't see a problem with citing two different articles in it. If you're making reference to WP:NBASIC, which requires sources to be intellectually independent of each other, I don't see a problem there either, since the two articles are not derivatives of each other and are about different subjects. This footnote on NBASIC makes it clear what "intellectually independent of each other" means, and I don't see a problem here with that. Cheers, Cremastra (talk) 15:26, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm.. In WP:SIRS (WP:MULTSOURCES) that is explained differently, possibly because the notability criteria are stricter for organisations. I may have applied this too broadly in the past? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:06, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever happens, it's currently written like a CV, and needs considerable cleanup. The sources don't look bad, though. SportingFlyer T·C 19:22, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 18:26, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - No reason to delete what can be reasonably improved. There is a reasonable presumption that sources that establish his notability exist. - Ike Lek (talk) 04:11, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Angle

AfDs for this article:

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

unnotable wrestler, only fame comes because of his brother Kurt Angle, fails GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:40, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Wrestling, and Pennsylvania. Shellwood (talk) 18:55, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

merge into Kurt Angle, parts of his personal life such as his involvement in a steroid ring have received some news coverage, which is worth mentioning. These news articles do primarily refer to him as "Kurt Angle's brother", so Kurt Angle is probably the best place for it. beepboopbwaph (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG. [41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55] I also suspect there is an article about him in the March 2004 edition of The Wrestler (listed at List of professional wrestling magazines) "March 2004: McMahon vs. McWoman: How Vince vs. Stephanie Nearly Ruined WWE! Also: Flair & Dusty, Eric Angle, Jeff Jarrett, Shannon Moore, what's ahead in '04." The title of that issue is listed here ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:22, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those are all either one paragraph blurbs, or the fact he's Kurt Angle's brother. As noted here, "having a famous relative is not, in and of itself, sufficient to justify an independent article", and he does not pass GNG. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:11, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appeared on WWE national television on numerous occasions and a significant amount of coverage noted above. KaisaL (talk) 18:32, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Quick question, did he ever appear on WWE national television without his brother? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Kurt Angle. I don't feel like he's notable enough to warrant his own article, and the closest thing he does on TV is the "Twin Magic" with Kurt, who is the more notable of the two. Hansen Sebastian (Talk) 05:46, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:24, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2021

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

The 2023 version of these awards was closed as a result of an AfD last year as a redirect (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards 2023). CNMall41 and at least one other editor have redirected this as per that afd's result, but they keep getting reverted by ip editors, who never improve the article. CNMall41's rationale for the other year also applies here: "Fails WP:GNG. Main page Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards exists which is also likely not notable so not seeing how this would meet notability guidelines. Cannot find enough coverage to establish it for this specific year. " Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:53, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:59, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A ceremony where competing networks are effectively excluded, so this is just a fan-voted de facto 'employee of the year' ceremony. Nathannah • 📮 20:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Thanks for the ping. My contention is stated in the AfD recommendation and edit summaries. The individual year is not notable as references just talk about winners, not about the show itself. Even the main award page is short of significant coverage about the award (just references verifying winners and nominees). Note that the 2023 award was previously decided at AfD to merge. Should this close as the same (or delete), I will be WP:BOLDly merging years 2014 through current. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:45, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. What is the target article that would be identified if this article was changed to a Redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:14, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As best I can tell, the intended redirect target is Zee Marathi Utsav Natyancha Awards; this has been alluded to (just without the link) elsewhere in this discussion, and was also the target article for the repeatedly-contested BLARs. (I offer no opinion or further comment.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:38, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I'm not fluent enough in foreign languages to fully assess the sources for notability, but I want to push back on the idea that it is not notable as references just talk about winners, not about the show itself. In my experience, this is not how awards ceremonies are assessed. Consider something like 74th Writers Guild of America Awards – the only references are about the nominees and winners, yet I doubt anyone would seriously challenge that article's notability. If reliable, independent sources discuss the ceremony's nominees and winners as a group, then it is reasonable to create a list for the nominees and winners at the ceremony; see Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists#Notability. Now, I don't know enough about Indian media to gauge if the provided sources are reliable and independent of the network presenting the awards, hence my lack of a !vote – but if they are reliable and independent, I think the ceremony is notable. RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:39, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a related deletion discussion showing that individual year awards are notable based on winner lists? I do not see where the WGA awards you linked to was every evaluated. Simply existing does not mean it is notable.--CNMall41 (talk) 23:49, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My entire point is the lack of any attempts to delete the list – nobody has challenged its notability even though the sources only cover that year's winners/nominees. This is only one example from many similar awards ceremony lists (for instance, the WGA, DGA, and PGA Awards), showing a WP:IMPLICITCONSENSUS that this is acceptable for proving notability. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:56, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So you are saying that since no one has challenged its notability until now then it must be notable? I don't follow. Please see this as well. Again, can you point to a deletion discussion where this has been the case? I am trying to see where there is consensus for your original contention.--CNMall41 (talk) 05:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My point is there aren't deletion discussions for articles like the WGA ceremonies because the cited coverage of winners and nominees precludes any need for AFD in the first place.

Perhaps this is a better way of thinking about it, using the 74th WGA Awards as an example: Sources such as this, this, and this cover a single group of awards. This group of awards is known collectively as the 74th WGA Awards. There is not much coverage of the ceremony, but that's not what the article is focused on. It is primarily focused on the group of awards, not the ceremony or presentation, and coverage of the former meets notability guidelines.

Bringing it back to this article, if sources cover the group of award nominees and winners, that would show the topic's notability. There could be other issues – perhaps the sources are not independent of the network broadcasting the event or are otherwise unreliable. I'm not in a good spot to judge that; I just want to emphasize that if the article is deleted or redirected, it should not be because "sources only cover the nominees and winners". RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:10, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your contention, but we will have to agree to disagree at this point. Again, just because something has NOT been nominated for deletion does not mean it IS notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:34, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:22, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Repatriation of the Benin Bronzes to Nigeria

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

WP:POVFORK of Benin Bronzes#Subsequent sales, restitutions and repatriations with biased language such as growing global awareness of colonial injustices and profound spiritual, historical and artistic significance. This content belongs at the Benin Bronzes article. Astaire (talk) 21:23, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Museums and libraries, and Nigeria. Astaire (talk) 21:23, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect Benin Bronzes#Subsequent sales, restitutions and repatriations needs some sections to break it up for clearer organization, but there's simply no reason why this needs to be a largely duplicative separate article. Reywas92^Talk 21:34, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I didn't do a deep comparison of this and the content in the Benin Bronzes article so if there is anything in this that is NOT in that article then I hope that the editor will engage with that article instead of trying to create a new one. I also will say, as I do often, that article titles should be considered as search elements, and my take is that someone interested in the bronzes and their repatriation would likely type in "Benin ..." and not "Repatriation ...". However, since redirects aren't expensive I have no objection to creating one. Lamona (talk) 23:08, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as has similar info to The role of museums in repatriating African ancestors which is also in an AFD, and any unique notable info can either be Merged to Benin Bronzes or Repatriation (cultural property) under "International examples" as Africa doesn't have its own entry yet, but is well mentioned from other countries returning items to Africa.Lorraine Crane (talk) 05:56, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Benin Bronzes#Subsequent sales, restitutions and repatriations. It isn't all bad, but it doesn't need it's own article at this time. - Ike Lek (talk) 03:55, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete - which is it?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James Brown (internet personality)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/James Brown (internet personality)

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

Fails WP:CREATIVE. There are many people in history who have gone viral for one thing but it didn't make them long-term notable; ie WP:SINGLEEVENT. This article has no reason to stay. It is mostly about a controversy with another creative Bobrisky; which has this article leaning towards WP:PSEUDO. Besides him being known for cross-dressing in Nigeria (an act that would be reported by the blogs/websites/news regardless of the person), there is no point in this person having an article. It also fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:BASIC. There is no sources that are verifying this person as a professional dancer. There is a source that mentioned he released a single but it is not notable as it did not chart, receive award nominations/wins, or receive any music certifications. Sackkid (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sexuality and gender, and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 22:01, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Also note this article was started by the subject himself, a clear violation of WP:AUTOBIO. Sackkid (talk) 22:09, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't see evidence that the article was started by the subject - the behavior at Special:Contributions/Buchei is consistent with a sockpuppet of an experienced editor (starting in sandbox, etc). The subject has contributed to it though (Special:Contributions/Wfjamesbrown). Dreamyshade (talk) 21:03, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Thank you for raising the concern, Dreamyshade. Just to clarify: the article was not started by the subject, nor is the editor User:Buchei a sockpuppet or connected to the subject or any other expereinced in any way. The article was originally created as part of a Wikipedia training workshop for queer persons held in Lagos, Nigeria focused on bridging the knowledge gap around underrepresented identities, particularly the LGBTQ+ community in West Africa. I co-facilitated this training alongside other experienced Wikimedians and advised all trainees to begin drafting their articles in their sandbox which explains the use of the sandbox in this case. While it’s possible that the subject, or a fan, may have later edited via Special:Contributions/Wfjamesbrown, that edit is separate and does not undermine the good-faith contribution of the original article creator. Thanks again for the vigilance, and for all your edits on the article. Kaizenify (talk) 06:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, that was a mistake on my part. It wasn't started by the subject but it was edited several times by the subject on the following dates: November 27 (2 times) and December 31 (3 times) in 2021, lastly on April 4, 2022. After his last edit, he warned about further editing his own page as a conflict of interest. Sackkid (talk) 23:10, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT and WP:OR. What a mess: it's like a games of Twelves meets a Battenberg pastry. As I've written dozens of times, autobiographies are almost always original research. I have complete sympathy with the subject, who is subject to discrimination I haven't seen in the United States in my lifetime. Bearian (talk) 02:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:31, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CREATIVE, WP:BLP1E, etc. Going viral once isn't pageworthy. Astaire (talk) 17:13, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Keep. An article being in bad shape is not a good reason to delete. With a quick news search, I found a decent source for him being a dancer, along with other material showing an argument for WP:BASIC as an internet personality: Brown was featured in a notable documentary, and there is a volume of ongoing coverage about him in Nigerian press. However, much of that is relatively light coverage rather than substantial in-depth coverage. I suspect that somebody else could spend a bit more time here and gather together more sources to assemble a decent article. Dreamyshade (talk) 21:03, 2 July 2025 (UTC) Updated vote based on finding additional sources. Dreamyshade (talk) 20:13, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I appreciate the restructure of the page and I respect your comment but he is not a professional dancer. Also as I said in the above comment, "Besides him being known for cross-dressing in Nigeria (an act that would be reported by the blogs/websites/news regardless of the person), there is no point in this person having an article." Anyone who "cross-dress" in Nigeria would receive significant coverage by the media. Public disagreements should not be mentioned in the 'personal life' section. Also the film or documentary that he is featured in does not feature him as main topic. He is just a person that was interviewed in the documentary, he is not even mentioned as a cast member. Sackkid (talk) 22:17, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The notability claim is for being an internet personality. The article doesn't claim he's a professional dancer, just that he's a dancer, and the source I added verifies that he's a dancer.

Are you saying that coverage of a cross-dressing person in Nigerian news media seems to be WP:ROUTINE, so it doesn't count for notability? I don't see evidence supporting that in the news coverage about him. Much of the news coverage repeats or reflects something he said or did on social media, which seems to be newsworthy because he has such a large social media following. A fair bit of the coverage also has an aspect of tabloid/WP:SENSATIONAL coverage related to his gender non-conformity, with superficial reporting that does not make an effort to verify claims, which is a large part of why I voted weak keep.

As you can read in the sources I added, the NY Times review and Vogue review both describe Brown as one of two main figures in the documentary, not simply interviewed in the film. Dreamyshade (talk) 01:45, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In a nutshell, that's exactly what I'm saying. I can list several people in Nigeria who have gone viral several times and provide an article that mentions their names but it doesn't make them notable. He hasn't done anything of notable status. Social media posts and everything of that nature are trivial. The mere appearance of the subject in a film, song, video game, television show, or the like is insufficient. Furthermore, when we describe a topic's profession, that's just what it is.. a profession. So with that being said, if he is not a professional comedian, professional dancer, or anything else, it should be removed. For example, when Wikipedia says "Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter is an American singer, songwriter, actress, and businesswoman". All of those titles are appropriate because that is a profession that she earns money in. It doesn't say "dancer" because she is not in the profession of dancing, nor does she make her money from dancer. And regardless of his position in the film or documentary, it still unnecessary for him to have a page. If anything, then this page should probably be merged with the film. You yourself voted that the page was a weak keep, which basically means it might as be deleted because it is not worth keeping. And as said before, it still fails the criterias mentioned above. Sackkid (talk) 02:23, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a comedian, it needs to be established that he does comedic work (stand-up, comedy-streaming videos, etc.). As a singer, he needs to have a charting song/album, certified album, major-label music release, etc. If you are claiming that he is a brand influencer, he needs to have been involved in major endorsements. If you are claiming that he is an internet personality or content creator, he needs to meet the guidelines of WP:CREATIVE. None of these apply to him. Sackkid (talk) 02:29, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A person doesn't have to meet WP:CREATIVE if they meet WP:BASIC. I've added more sources, and it still looks to me like there's an argument for WP:BASIC, but I'd like to hear from people familiar with Nigerian news media who can better evaluate the sources. Adjusted the article to describe his dancing, comedy, etc., as part of his content creation work, rather than as a separate profession. Dreamyshade (talk) 03:42, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. So the page has been restructured so that handled the WP:PSEUDO problem but it still fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:ANYBIO. He is still only known for his viral moment and the fact that he cross-dresses in Nigeria; a defiant of Nigerian law which many have gained recognition from. Also, the infobox on the page says he is a comedian and also a brand influencer but there is nothing supporting that he is a professional comedian or professional brand influencer. Sackkid (talk) 22:48, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Per some of the comment made by Dreamyshade as the subject clearly meets WP:BASIC and WP:GNG through significant coverage in independent, reliable secondary sources that go beyond mere trivial mentions or routine tabloid pieces.

Brown is not merely notable for a single viral moment (per WP:SINGLEEVENT), while he first gained visibility during the 2018 arrest, his relevance has extended far beyond that. He has written an autobiography "I wrote a book to tell my life's story – James Brown". Punch Newspapers. 10 June 2022., released a single and launched a music career "James Brown drops single after Burna's Grammy win". Legit.ng. 30 March 2021., starred in the 2024 web series Hotel Palava BellaNaija, maintained ongoing public visibility and impact, including being the subject of legislative discourse surrounding the 2022 Nigerian Cross-Dressing Bill per here "Cross-dressing: Bobrisky, James Brown risk jail". Premium Times. 5 April 2022. and in Punch. All these clearly disqualifies the WP:SINGLEEVENT concern as he has remained culturally and socially relevant.

Also the subject has received extensive, non-trivial coverage in a wide range of reliable sources, including:

The New York Times – as part of the HBO documentary The Legend of the Underground which highlights queer activism in Nigeria.

Vogue (June 2021) – features Brown’s role as a leading figure of queer resistance in Nigeria.

"James Brown: Meet popular Nigeria cross dresser". BBC News Pidgin. 20 July 2020. Retrieved 7 June 2021..

His queer presence has also shaped various academic and policy literature:

Academic study: “Queer Nigerians Bravely Breaking Gender Barriers” – MambaOnline (2024)

Journal article: “Discursive Tropes of Aggression Against Queer-Sexuality in Nigerian Standup Comedy” – Sexuality & Culture (Springer, 2024)

This confirms his notability goes beyond personal drama and into societal, legal, and cultural relevance and duly satisfy WP:BASIC. Kaizenify (talk) 10:23, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just he wrote a book does not make him notable. He would fail WP:AUTHOR as he does not meet the criteria. As for him releasing a single, that does not make him a singer. That song was released in 2021 and does not have chart positions, sell significant figure/certifications, or win any major awards. Starring in a web-series and not a major mainstream series is enough for him to fail WP:NACTOR. And again, anyone who cross-dress in Nigeria is going to have some media coverage. There is a published article about who, subjectively, are the most popular cross-dressers in Nigeria but none of the mentioned people (excluding Bobrisky) are notable. "Journal article: “Discursive Tropes of Aggression Against Queer-Sexuality in Nigerian Standup Comedy” – Sexuality & Culture (Springer, 2024)" does not list him nor does it establish him as a comedian. When we say a person is a singer, comedian, actor, etc., it has to be established that those are their careers, not hobbies or one-offs. At the most, James Brown is a hobbyist and he fits certain criterias of WP:LOWPROFILE. Sackkid (talk) 20:47, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability does not require conventional career labels to be “formally established” per WP:ANYBIO. The breadth and depth of independent coverage, the substantive presence in mainstream and academic sources, and continued influence over several years all confirm that this is not a low-profile or fleeting figure, but a culturally significant personality in Nigeria and beyond. Again, while it is true that merely writing a book or releasing a song does not, on their own, confer notability under WP:AUTHOR or WP:MUSICBIO, the totality of coverage and cultural relevance of James Brown warrants keeping the article, per WP:GNG and WP:ENT. The New York Times, Vogue, Punch ,or BBC pidgin are not blog posts or casual mentions, they are substantial media features that focus on him, fulfilling WP:GNG. Lastly, he stars (not appears) in a multi-episode Nollywood web series (Hotel Palava), which received notable media attention, further establishing a career trajectory in entertainment and his HBO documentary appearance is not one-off or minor, it's a feature placement in a global production, reviewed by RogerEbert.com and discussed in major international outlets. Kaizenify (talk) 06:17, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The journal article "Discursive Tropes of Aggression Against Queer-Sexuality in Nigerian Standup Comedy" does include a couple pages of material about James Brown - an academic analysis of a bit that a comedian did about Brown. If you have access to The Wikipedia Library, it has the full text available. That citation supports a claim that Brown is a noted and criticized cross dresser, not a claim that Brown himself is a comedian.

Brown does not fit WP:LOWPROFILE because because he has actively (and successfully!) sought out media attention for years. Dreamyshade (talk) 19:47, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Meets WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. The subject receives significant, sustained coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources:

- RogerEbert.com review of HBO’s documentary The Legend of the Underground – names Brown a principal protagonist and analyses his cultural impact.^[1]
- Vogue feature on the documentary and Nigeria’s queer community – profiles Brown’s activism and social‑media reach.^[2]
- National‑press interview in Punch about his 2022 memoir The Chronicles of an African Princess.^[3]
- Ongoing mainstream coverage such as Vanguard’s 2024 report on his visit to Bobrisky in prison, showing notability well beyond the initial viral clip.^[4]
- International news report by Al Jazeera on the 2018–2020 court case that first brought him to global attention.^[5]

Coverage spans 2018–2025 and deals with activism, media career, legal history and public image, so this is **not** a WP:SINGLEEVENT or WP:BLP1E situation. Deleting per WP:TNT would discard a topic that clearly satisfies the General Notability Guideline. Mediascriptor (talk) 09:10, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

^ Daniels, Robert. "The Legend of the Underground". RogerEbert.com.
^ Desmond, Vincent. "A New Documentary Highlights the Resilience and Joy of Nigeria's Queer Community". Vogue.
^ https://punchng.com/i-wrote-a-book-to-tell-my-lifes-story-james-brown/
^ https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/06/photos-james-brown-visits-bobrisky-at-kirikiri-correctional-centre/
^ https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/10/27/nigerian-judge-throws-out-case-against-47-men-over-homosexuality

Shirley Willard

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

WP:BLP of a local historian, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for historians. As always, people are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they have or had jobs, and have to be shown to pass certain defined notability criteria supported by WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about their work in media and/or books -- but this is referenced entirely to primary source content self-published by non-media organizations she was directly affiliated with, and shows absolutely no evidence of GNG-worthy sourcing at all. (For example, people do not become notable enough for Wikipedia articles by having staff profiles on the websites of their own employers, or contributor directories on the websites of publications that they wrote for — media unaffiliated with her work have to write about and analyze the significance of her work as news to make her notable on that basis.)
As her potential claim of notability is primarily local in nature rather than national, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to the necessary resources than I've got can actually find sufficient RS coverage to get her over the bar, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have significantly better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:54, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 16:54, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:18, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: She did win awards, including a state-wide award for her work. WP:Author doesn't require national accomplishments. One might make the case that winning an award from the state's primary historical society might be "significant critical attention"? --
Jaireeodell (talk) 21:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say people always have to have nationalized accomplishments to be eligible for an article — I said that because her notability claim is local rather than national in nature, I lack access to the kind of resources necessary to determine whether the article is salvageable with better referencing or not on my own, without bringing it to wider attention. People can get into Wikipedia on primarily local significance — but regardless of whether their notability claim is local or national in scope, people aren't exempted from having to have WP:GNG-worthy reliable sourcing.
Also, every award that exists does not constitute an automatic notability freebie — a person is not automatically notable just because the article has the word "award" in it, if the article doesn't have GNG-worthy reliable sourcing in it. "Significant critical attention", for the purposes of GNG, is a question of whether she's had news reportage and/or books written about her and her work, not just the fact of having been singled out for just any old award that exists — an award might help if it could be referenced to a newspaper article treating "Shirley Willard wins award" as news, but it doesn't help if you have to depend on content self-published by the organization that gave her the award to source the statement because media coverage about the award doesn't exist. We're not just looking for "has done stuff", we're looking for "has had media coverage and/or books written and published about the stuff she did". Bearcat (talk) 16:25, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ミラP@Miraclepine 21:59, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wonderful woman, no doubt, but I simply cannot find any of her writings that aren't "self-published" - i.e. by the historical society she was working with in some capacity. She did get two awards from the Indiana Historical Society, but I don't think that is going to confirm notability. She is given credit for unearthing the story of this "Trail of Death" but I only find a very few mentions of it by folks not directly associated with the historical society. Lamona (talk) 16:11, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just asking for clarification on what you are asking for here- are you asking for the historical veracity of the Potawatomi Trail of Death? If so, there is already a Wikipedia article discussing its history. I am not writing that she was responsible for discovering it, she is just a historian who has taken important steps to preserve its memory in local history. Willard is responsible for the Trail of Courage festival and commemorative caravan, if that's what you meant. Here are some mentions of the Trail of Living Courage Festival and caravan from sources not associated with Willard or the Fulton County Historical Society:

https://www.dar.org/national-society/american-spirit-magazine/beacon-history-shirley-willard (Page dedicated to her on the Daughters of the American Revolution website, already in article)

https://www.southbendtribune.com/story/news/local/2018/09/13/caravan-to-trace-potawatomi-trail-of-death-from-rochester/45724091/ (News article about about Trail of Death commemorative caravan Willard organized)

https://www.in.gov/ibc/legacyprojects/3261.htm (entry on Indiana government website about the festival, already in article)

If these sources are satisfactory, I can start reworking the article around these and replace the Fulton Co. Historical Society ones. DeishaJ (talk) 14:22, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will look at these sources, but, no, I'm not asking about the trail of death. This article is about HER so we need sources about HER. Lamona (talk) 15:23, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some additional sources I've found:

https://www.carrollcountycomet.com/articles/historian-recognized-with-statewide-award/ (News article referencing her Lifetime Achievement award. I have contacted the Indiana Historical Society to see if they have any writings or press releases on her that would work as citations).

https://www.rochsent.com/willard-featured-on-publishers-blog/article_1ec925d0-4190-541b-9020-c01655ba74d8.html (Lists her history and achievements with the Fulton Co. Historical Society. Also mentions her Lifetime Achievement award and Golden Hoosier award, mentions her being a torch bearer in the Indiana Bicentennial Torch Relay. I have confirmed her participation, she is listed here under Fulton County. Link to the page of the Indiana government website I found the PDF on.

Additional sources for consideration:

https://www.potawatomi.org/blog/2016/09/28/chairman-barrett-honored-at-2016-trail-of-courage-festival/

https://www.potawatomi.org/blog/2017/06/27/indiana-declares-indian-day/

I will let others decide if these sources are good enough to work in this article, as they are technically blog posts. I will argue, though, that they are from the official Potawatomi tribe website. These sources mention Willard playing a key role in securing proclamations from Mike Pence and Eric Holcomb in recognition of the Trail of Death and establishing remembrance/heritage days. These might be notable additions to her article, but I am unsure if they would meet proper reference criteria. Is there any way to find good sources for these proclamations:

Mike Pence declaring Sept. 20, 2014 Potawatomi Trail of Death Remembrance Day

Eric Holcomb declaring April 22, 2017 Indiana Indian Day

Thanks!
DeishaJ (talk) 15:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, blog posts are not considered reliable because they are informal and lack a true editorial oversight. The DAR one is pretty good but may not be considered independent because she was a member of DAR and this is a "member profile." Press releases are never considered reliable sources because they are by definition promotional, and thus have a non-neutral point of view. I hope that others will weigh in on the awards. (I advise looking at the documents about those awards - unless you are already familiar with them.) Lamona (talk) 02:42, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:40, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: So far, deletion looks likely, but at least a little more participation is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:18, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chase Ergen

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

Semi-advertorialized (see "public image" section in particular) WP:BLP of a businessperson, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for businesspeople. As always, people in business are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they have jobs, and have to be shown to pass certain specific criteria supported by WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them in reliable sources -- but this is referenced almost entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability, such as "staff" profiles or press releases self-published by his own companies and/or directory entries, with very little GNG-worthy coverage shown at all.
Further, this has already been moved into draftspace once for lacking GNG-worthy sourcing, only to get moved back into articlespace by its own creator two days later -- so while moving it back into draftspace a second time is obviously possible, I'm not going to do that without wider discussion about whether it's warranted in this case or not. Bearcat (talk) 14:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 14:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Finance, Politics, and Colorado. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:55, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG and WP:V. This person is not notable, and we can't verify notability if all the sources are tied somehow to him. Bearian (talk) 09:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I dropped a lot of the extra sources. I think notability is warranted but I had to drop the majority of the article to find it. Dflovett (talk) 18:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Obvious spam, I suspect paid - David Gerard (talk) 19:54, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Move back to Draftspace. I see enough notability in my own googling of "Chase Ergen" and exploration of related topics, but I don't think the current article properly conveys it. I am going to go in and trim down some of this, add in more reliable sources. Dflovett (talk) 16:49, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I look deeper, there are lots of issues with the current references setup. Will be attempting to clean those up as well. Dflovett (talk) 17:47, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly fails WP:GNG. Likely COI/paid editing. Edwardx (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed on all the signs of COI/paid editing but now that I've trimmed it down and dropped a lot of the junk sources, I think it doesn't fail WP:GNG anymore. I've also neutralized the tone, or at least I consider it to be neutralized. Dflovett (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments on Dflovett's changes?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:43, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move back to Draftspace or Keep. From my POV, I've made significant improvements but this still might belong back in the draftspace for now.Dflovett (talk) 13:50, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tbh, I've looked more at some of the references I left in there and I think Move back to draftspace or Delete are the only paths forward. Keep just isn't viable as of now. Dflovett (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:16, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Green Monkey Records

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

I do not believe this indie record label passes WP:GNG. The article as written is mostly referenced to primary sources or blogs. I could not find much coverage in my own search, just a couple short articles from local newspapers found on newspapers.com. Mbdfar (talk) 14:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Washington. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:06, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in the process of finding WP:IRS and was able to find one today from The Rocket magazine https://washingtondigitalnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=RCT19860401.1.9&srpos=2&e=-------en-20-RCT-1--txt-txIN-green+monkey+records------ I assume it is acceptable. If not please let me know. I will add more content and WP:IRS as time permits. I am fairly new here as far as contributing. Otheriver (talk) 23:49, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do consider that a WP:RS, but more will be needed to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NCORP. Consider WP:AUD – The Rocket at the time was a small, Seattle-based music magazine. My search also turned up some additional The Rocket articles, but are you able to find additional sources that cover the subject in-depth? Mbdfar (talk) 18:55, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure yet. I'm still at the beginning of my research. I was going to check a Seattle Times article the same day, but it was behind a paywall. I have some other places I need to check and read yet. Otheriver (talk) 01:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there are enough sources to establish notability given that there is less media available online from that time frame. Also the label had a few established acts. Darkm777 (talk) 18:51, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where are these sources that establish notability? Mbdfar (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I had tagged this in 2023 and see nothing that has taken place since that time to establish notability (a quick BEFORE search finds nothing meeting WP:CORPDEPTH. As far as "there is less media available online from that time frame" - what time frame? The 1980s? We have archives and I searched those as well. Didn't find what is necessary to show WP:NCORP. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:52, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The citations presented are OK and will pass notability guidelines. The PopMatters review and KEXP coverage provide independent recognition. Yolandagonzales (talk) 15:07, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Album reviews don't cut it. This is a company so WP:NCORP applies. Can you point out the WP:THREE that meet WP:ORGCRIT?--CNMall41 (talk) 16:01, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which citations? One of the two blogspot posts, the WordPress page, perhaps the book titled Gobbledygook: A Dictionary That's 2/3 Accurate, 1/3 Nonsense? Otherwise, some stuff that's entirely about Tom Dyer, The Green Pajamas, and one album the label published. Trivial mentions about the company itself. The Rocket article is the only source presented that, imo, lends notability to the label. Mbdfar (talk) 17:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is also coverage in The News Tribune by Gillian G Gaar from 1988 [56] (some quotes from Tom Dyer, but info about the label too, in an article about many independent labels). I have found a couple of articles about Tom Dyer from 1986 and 2021 in The Olympian [57], [58] which include info about the label. There's also some coverage in The Strangest Tribe: How a Group of Seattle Rock Bands Invented Grunge [59], but I'm not sure how much - the index lists 4 page numbers, but the digital book has no page numbers and not all pages are visible, unfortunately. It looks like there is probably enough. If there isn't enough for an article about the record label, there probably should be one about Tom Dyer. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:06, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UTC+09:45

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

I can't find any evidence that this is a thing. Possible hoax. Certainly appears to fails WP:GNG. TarnishedPath^talk 06:07, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. TarnishedPath^talk 06:07, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What timezone did Eucla use when Western Australia had daylight savings time? Surely they weren't using a time zone that is 15 minutes behind the rest of the state? Steelkamp (talk) 06:17, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've found reference to Eucla using UTC+08:45, but not as an official thing (emergency services use standard WA time). As far as I can tell UTC+09:45 isn't a thing. TarnishedPath^talk 06:24, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article does say that it isn't an official thing. Seems plausible that it could be real, but 15 years is enough time to get citations. Ike Lek (talk) 06:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article for UTC+08:45, which covers the what is unofficially referred to as Central Western Time (CWT), and I was able to find sourcing to indicate that is definitely a thing. The UTC+09:45 bit I found zero on. Not even anything in primary or unreliable sources. You're correct that it's possible it could be a thing, which is the only reason I didn't CSD it as a hoax. Also, yeah 15 years is long enough to get citations. TarnishedPath^talk 06:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There's a quote in this article that seems to hint that some roadhouses in the area used to observe SA daylight savings. It says: Mr Pike has lived on the Nullarbor for 47 years and said that at least today — removing the daylight saving component from the South Australian side — helped a bit. But mostly people leave baffled. So it might be true that some roadhouses on the SA side of the unofficial Central Western Time Zone used to use UTC+09:45 during daylight savings. But that's reading into the quote a fair bit — I couldn't find anything more definitive. If anyone can find a slightly better source, maybe a merge to UTC+08:45? MCE89 (talk) 06:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I read that quote to be referencing Australian Central Daylight Time (UTC+10:30), when it states that removing daylight saving from the SA side helped. TarnishedPath^talk 06:51, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah very possible. I thought he might have meant that at some point they stopped using daylight savings within the SA side of the Central Western area, but he might also just be referring to the end of daylight savings during that particular year. Seems plausible that this was in use in a handful of places at some point, but I agree that I can't see anything to verify that. MCE89 (talk) 06:59, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I was just looking at Time in Australia and I found a reference on github indicating that it was briefly a thing. However the source is not reliable. TarnishedPath^talk 08:51, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think redirecting to UTC+08:45 would be better than deleting. Steelkamp (talk) 09:02, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not opposed to that. However such a redirect would be unlikely to survive a discussion at WP:RFD and I've just started a discussion proposing that UTC+08:45 be merged into Time in Australia due to heavy overlap. TarnishedPath^talk 09:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Tristem

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a former journalist who is now a crime writer and press officer. I cannot find significant coverage to add. All I found was this brief review in a local paper of one of his books, with no actual content about him. The existing sources are Goodreads, Amazon, and a decent piece of coverage in another local paper, albeit based on an interview. This isn't enough for the article to meet WP:GNG, and he doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR or WP:ANYBIO. Tacyarg (talk) 05:57, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United Kingdom. Tacyarg (talk) 05:57, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:22, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amir Bashti

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

The highest level the subject played in was for the reserve affiliate of Atlanta United before retiring from the sport. WP:GNG Raskuly (talk) 05:41, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, California, and Georgia (U.S. state). Raskuly (talk) 05:41, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:18, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject appears to have coverage in [[60]], [[61]], and [[62]]. I'd say this subject meets the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 15:07, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
pinging @GiantSnowman: per their request Ike Lek (talk) 04:59, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source 1 is about his team's new jersey. Source 2 is fine. Source 3 is about the academy he was part of. Overall not enough. Find another source or two like #2 and I'll re-consider. Giant Snowman 09:04, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While Bashti isn't the main focus of the third source, I would encourage you to reevaluate the level of coverage he received in it, as it is quite substantial. I do not have paywall access to this [63], but it could be something. [64] also contains some good coverage. You could argue these next ones aren't either independent nor substantial, but I wanted to include them as well in case I am wrong in my assessment [65][66][67]. Also, here is some high school coverage I found while looking that almost certainly doesn't show notability, but I thought was funny and worth sharing [68]. Ike Lek (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above notability. Also, the "reserve affiliate of Atlanta United" is still considered professional. --Ronnnaldo7 (talk) 17:57, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Level of professional play is not relevant to notability. Giant Snowman 09:04, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further comment on cited sourcing would be useful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 05:13, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Railway Transport of Ukraine

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

Article PRODded with reason "Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG." Article dePRODded by artucle creator with reason "Wikipedia talk:Notability (academic journals)#RfC on notability criteria. It's just an essay, not a guideline. Therefore, invoking this essay fails as a rationale for a proposed deletion. NJournals may be an essay only, but GNG most definitively is not. PROD reason still stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 08:09, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals, Transportation, and Ukraine. Randykitty (talk) 08:09, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Apologies to Randykitty; I concur that WP:GNG is a relevant rationale. I think I may have been hasty in translating this article from uk:Залізничний транспорт України (журнал) to English before checking whether it would meet the GNG on English Wikipedia. Although it is frequently mentioned in independent, secondary, reliable sources, and used as a reliable source in other journals, meeting the WP:SIGCOV requirement is going to be more difficult than I expected, at least from English-language sources. It may be possible to do so with Ukrainian-language sources, but the digital, autotranslatable sources in Ukrainian that I can find about this journal might not be enough. It probably would require an editor who is better at reading Ukrainian texts in printed works or PDF files without machine translations than I can. Anyone reading this who could, or knows someone who could, is welcome to try! But if not, might it be a better idea to Merge the relevant contents to Ukrainian Railways#Science and education section for now? It seems the best place to keep it until (if ever) this journal merits a stand-alone article. Good day, NLeeuw (talk) 09:59, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 05:11, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Espinar bus crash

AfDs for this article:

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability, and high-casualty bus crashes are common. Fails WP:EVENT. Per WP:NOPAGE, this is better covered at List of traffic collisions (2000–present) or Yauri, Peru. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Peru. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It hasn't even been a year since the last AfD. – Ike Lek (talk) 06:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2014 Khairpur bus crash

AfDs for this article:

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability, and high-casualty bus crashes are common. Fails WP:EVENT. Per WP:NOPAGE, this is better covered at List of traffic collisions (2000–present) or an article about this bypass if it's notable. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Pakistan. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question - I can't not ask what your rational for saying "high-casualty bus crashes are common" is. Surely you have some reasoning behind what on the surface can seem like an absurd statement? – Ike Lek (talk) 06:18, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ike Lek "Why Deadly Bus Accidents Are So Common in Developing Countries", an article published by Time magazine last year probably has the answers you're looking for. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 08:47, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Golaghat highway accident

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability, and high-casualty bus crashes are common. Fails WP:EVENT. Per WP:NOPAGE, this is better covered at List of traffic collisions (2000–present) or possibly an article about the location. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, India, and Assam. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastico (web hosting)

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

WP:N. Fantastico is a lesser known competitor of Softaculous, and even Softaculous is of questionable notability. Seungri400 (talk) 03:52, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:23, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dalekmania

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

A documentary film on Dalek films from the 1960s, named after the Dalekmania of the 1960s (Covered in the Dalek article). Having extensively researched the actual Dalekmania after which this is named, I could not find a single source actually discussing this documentary; any sources discussing Dalekmania discuss the actual Dalekmania, not this production. The actual content of the article is just a very opinionated summary of the actual documentary's contents, and the only sources verify what the actual Dalekmania was. No indication of notability at all, and a clear GNG failure; I'd suggest redirecting to the Dalekmania section of the Dalek article as an AtD, given the actual Dalekmania is substantially more notable even if only discussed as part of a larger article. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:54, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Film, Television, and United Kingdom. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:54, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hootan Dolati

AfDs for this article:

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

He is not notable. I couldn't even find him in news, Google (actually was mentioned in some posts about being in prison but not enough) or other search engines. Esteghlal Tehran Fans (talk) 02:51, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Esteghlal Tehran Fans (talk) 02:51, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rapolas

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

It should be merged into Raphael (given name) Rafael Hello! 02:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or merge, this seems like it is a disambiguation page, erraneously created as article page. Sys64wiki (talk) 04:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It's a WP:NAMEPAGE, created as a WP:NAMEPAGE and not erroneously. On what policy should it be deleted?? ExRat (talk) 04:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's a Dynamic List of people specifically named Rapolas, not Raphael. It is used for navigation. There are multitudes of these lists for almost every name conceivable. No idea what the rationale of the nominator is. Why would Rapolas be merged with Raphael? Even the surname Raphael (literally the same name) has its own page. ExRat (talk) 02:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not making it clear. I want to merge it because it means Raphael in a different language. The article Raphael has a name list that includes the name "Raphael" and other cognates since it is the main name. Since "Rapolas" is a cognate of Raphael and it's article is a name list, it should be deleted and added into the name list part of "Raphael." Rafael Hello! 03:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Why should it be merged with Raphael? It's not the same name, it's a variant – a different name, with the same origin – but, otherwise, a different name. Look at the page John (given name), for example. All variants have separate entries. It's nonsensical to 1. merge a different (even related) name list to a list of individuals with another name. 2. Try to list every person who has a Wiki article on a single page who has a variant or cognate of a name; that would be extraordinarily cumbersome and unwieldy. Please read WP:NAMEPAGE. ExRat (talk) 04:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is a situation where some overlap is okay. Instances can both be included in the main Raphael (given name) page where appropriate (ideally in their own section) and also warrant having their own page for navigation reasons. – Ike Lek (talk) 06:15, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Lithuania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:23, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. This is a name page, and there are multiple notable people with the name. Does the nom think that Ivan, Sean, etc. should also be merge to John (given name) just because they're related? Clarityfiend (talk) 08:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juwon Lawal Razaq

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

Does not appear to pass WP:GNG. No valid secondary sourcing that is independent. This reads like a press kit, heavily promotional. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 02:13, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 02:13, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abubakar M. Gana

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

This article fails WP:GNG, no valid secondary sourcing to prove notability. Has been flagged as problematic since 2022. Basically a résumé. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 02:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 02:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Communist Party of Bolivia (Marxist–Leninist)

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

small party that was active for 13 years, with only a scant coverage of the book "Maoism in the Developing World", "International Maoism in the Developing World" by Frank Molano, without expanding on anything else--Lolitoo049 (talk) 00:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 July 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:01, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question – What is the specific argument for deletion here? – Ike Lek (talk) 01:23, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

small party valid only for 13 years then merged with Revolutionary Left Front (Bolivia) and little significant coverage Lolitoo049 (talk) 02:49, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So is the argument that there isn't enough WP:SIGCOV? I could try to go through some of the sources on the Óscar Zamora article in the next day or two and see if I can find any better coverage if that would help. Ike Lek (talk) 06:10, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Bolivia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lu Renjie

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Almost all sources are typical press releases. 虹易 (talk) 00:58, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. 虹易 (talk) 00:58, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for raising your concerns. I’d like to clarify that Lu Renjie is widely recognized in the Chinese-speaking art world and has substantial coverage across Chinese-language media and art publications. This includes:

- Independent news coverage in 上观新闻，腾讯，网易，搜狐，among many others.

- Reviews and profiles in reputable art journals and exhibition catalogs (e.g. baokuchina.com in Shanghai Tower)

- Entries on multiple Chinese-language wikis, including wikipedia zh.

I am working on adding more of these independent, non-promotional sources to the English Wikipedia article, with English translations where necessary for verification. I believe this breadth of coverage demonstrates that Lu Renjie meets the requirements of WP:GNG, not just through press releases but through in-depth reporting and analysis in independent sources.

I welcome any further advice on improving the article and am happy to collaborate. Miercat (talk) 02:23, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Lu Renjie (simplified Chinese: 陆人捷; traditional Chinese: 陸人捷) does not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline or Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria. This article mentions the subject in one sentence. This article is a press release from VSDesign, which put on the event in which the subject is a specially invited artist, so is not an independent source. This article provides significant coverage about the subject but is published by the subject's university so is not sufficiently independent. This article provides a few sentences of coverage about the subject's work of art at the the "Light Chaser – Tribute to Every Breakthrough" exhibition so is not significant coverage. This article provides a sentence of coverage and a few sentences of quotes from the subject regarding an event he created so is not significant coverage. I am open to reevaluating my position if significant coverage in independent reliable sources is found. Cunard (talk) 08:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files

File:End of subathon.png

There is lots of images of Ludwig on Wikicommons, so this one is unnecessary. Sahaib (talk) 11:59, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (album)

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (album) → List of Metallica demos (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Neither this list nor Metallica discography indicate there was an album with this title. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bomberos

Bomberos → Firefighter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Bomberos (Chilean firefighters) → Firefighter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No WP:FORRED. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:24, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Refine the second per Ninixed. Don't refine the first per Thryduulf. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:02, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Refine the second to Geography of firefighting#Chile. Neutral on the first. Ninixed (talk) 22:33, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget both to Geography of firefighting#Chile, where it's mentioned, per Ninixed. 9ninety (talk) 06:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC) self striking, see new comment below 9ninety (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Refine the second per Ninixed. Don't refine the first - per that page "Bomberos is the name given to firefighters in most Spanish-speaking countries" so pointing to a Chile-specific section would be inappropriate. Thryduulf (talk) 02:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the first and refine the second. Indeed, bombero simply means 'firefighter' in Spanish. Since firefighters have no special relevance to Spanish-speaking countries (vs. every where else), and since they have no special relevance to Chile (vs. every other Spanish-speaking country), neither the current redirect nor the refinement is appropriate for bomberos.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:31, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both. I was under the impression that the term bombero(s) was Chilean, but as Myceteae points out, it is simply Spanish for firefighter. I don't think it makes sense to delete Bomberos and keep Bomberos (Chilean firefighters), which is disambiguating from the former. I don't see any meaningful links to the latter either, so it's most likely not a useful redirect. 9ninety (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally inappropriate for "X (Y)" to exist when "X" doesn't without a very good reason, so oppose the course of action proposed by Myceteae. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:48, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is consensus for Bomberos but not for Bomberos (Chilean firefighters) which seems to be dependent on the former. Notified of this discussion at the suggested target. Also, Bomberos (Chilean firefighters) was merged to Firefighting worldwide in 2007, and I have tagged it as an {{R from merge}}.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with Pppery that the disambiguated redirect is dependent on the plain one existing. It is inappropriate for an article (or dab page) to be located at a disambiguated title when the base title doesn't exist or is a redirect to it, but that does not imply that a redirect at a disambiguated title requires the base title to be a blue link, nor can I think of a good reason why it should imply that. Thryduulf (talk) 10:00, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scraface

Scraface → Scarface (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely typo to dab page. Roast (talk) 03:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Adjacent character transpositions are a very common category of typo -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 04:49, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:49, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simbolul R4BIA

Simbolul R4BIA → Rabia sign (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Useless redirect, not mentioned anywhere in the target and was originally a page written in Romanian. Creator also had similar pages deleted. Should have been WP:G1 deleted. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NaMo

NaMo → Namo (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Re-target to Narendra Modi, most readers typing "NaMo" would be looking for Modi, as in the case of BoJo for Boris Johnson. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 06:12, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NH2CH(CH2CH2SCH3)COOH

NH2CH(CH2CH2SCH3)COOH → Methionine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is a very awkward notation for an amino acid. It is not mentioned at the target page or the related data page, despite both containing a variety of notations and identifiers. A web search for this ter, doesn't give me any results for the right molecule, instead giving me hits for cysteine and other amino acids. I do not think this is a plausible search term. Aside from the fact that it doesn't seem to be used anywhere else, anyone who knows enough organic chemistry to type out this abomination wouldn't, and probably has the 20 proteinogenic amino acids memorized anyways. Toadspike [Talk] 07:03, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AGONSA

AGONSA → Education in the Philippines (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
GAONSA → Education in the Philippines (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mnemonics for a method of solving math problems, not mentioned in the target article or anywhere else onwiki. May be specific to the Philippines but a quick google search does not confirm this. Rusalkii (talk) 06:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No mention anywhere on en.wp means that someone searching for information will not be helped, and like the nom I can't confirm this is exclusive to the Philippines. It's also possible that Agonsa is a neighbourhood in Benin. Thryduulf (talk) 10:07, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muƹawiya

Muƹawiya → Mu'awiya I (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I cannot find this usage anywhere else on the internet, though it's possible google is failing me due to the weird character. I don't believe ƹ and ' are reasonably interchangeable in this manner, though I am not a linguist and will gladly be corrected by someone who knows this area better than me. Rusalkii (talk) 04:03, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the article on ƹ implies that it was most commonly used in the 1940s-1980s, a period of time underrepresented on the the internet so a lack of uses known to Google is not definitive. The Arabic letter (Ayin#Arabic ʿayn) it is/was used to transcribe does appear in the Arabic name for the target given in the infobox ("معاوية"), so it is not impossible this is an old transliteration - however I am not an Arabic speaker or familiar with the target topic area at all, so I'm not really qualified to speak to its plausibility. I'll see if I can find an appropriate WikiProject to alert to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 10:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

271,000

271,000 → Holocaust denial (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Highly unlikely that this number is only relevent to this topic. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ouch 03:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules

Template:Crossrail 2 navbox

Template:Crossrail 2 navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Little point in having any navbox, let alone such a complex one, for a route that is proposed but is in no way currently being considered and is unlikely to be considered in the near future. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany

Deletion review

[Ebert-1] Daniels, Robert. "The Legend of the Underground". RogerEbert.com.

[Vogue-2] Desmond, Vincent. "A New Documentary Highlights the Resilience and Joy of Nigeria's Queer Community". Vogue.

[Punch-3] ttps://punchng.com/i-wrote-a-book-to-tell-my-lifes-story-james-brown/

[Vanguard-4] ttps://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/06/photos-james-brown-visits-bobrisky-at-kirikiri-correctional-centre/

[Aljazeera-5] ttps://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/10/27/nigerian-judge-throws-out-case-against-47-men-over-homosexuality

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creating articles Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and voting	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates

Speedy deletion candidates

Articles

Files

Categories

NEW NOMINATIONS

Ancient Hebrew people

Category:Television stations in the Tri-Cities, Tennessee–Virginia, market

Category:18th-century Canadian Baptist ministers

Redirects

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (album)

Bomberos

Scraface

Simbolul R4BIA

NaMo

NH2CH(CH2CH2SCH3)COOH

AGONSA

Muƹawiya

271,000

Templates and Modules

Miscellany

Deletion review