Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Purge

9 August 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Purge server cache

Gunnar Malmqvist (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. Only primary sources provided. LibStar (talk) 14:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 17:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please address the sourcing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 22:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Narendra Bhooshan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable civil servant. Civil servants aren't eligible under WP:NPOL, therefore notability needs to be established per WP:GNG, but the sources cited don't come even close to achieving this, being a mix of appointment announcements, primary sources, and ones where the subject is commenting on something ex officio. BEFORE finds nothing better.

This has been draftified (twice) already, so that's not an option, and I didn't think A7 would stick, hence here we are. The last discussion had minimal participation, so hoping for a bit more this time. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: While not cited in this article, this person was head of the early COVID-19 pandemic response in a nationally significant city in India as "the most senior official in the Gautam Budh Nagar district".[1] Probably warranting an article. Tsarivan613 (talk) 14:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any sources that discuss what he accomplished during his time as the head of the COVID-19 pandemic response team? If not, this would end up being just like every other regular announcement article. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:20, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like he helped arrange an oxygen generation security plan for Noida city during early 2021.[2] India had been experiencing shortages of supplemental oxygen during the delta variant wave.[3] Tsarivan613 (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The TOI source only mentions his comment on the issue. He gives out interview bytes all the time, since he is the head of the team. This falls under routine coverage and the journal entry does not mention him. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:09, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Rajput, Vinod (31 March 2020). "Greater Noida CEO to handle Covid-19 crisis after DM is shunted - Hindustan Times". Hindustan Times. Retrieved 2 August 2024.
  2. ^ Sinha, Snehil (24 May 2021). "Noida to form four oxygen supply chains". Times of India. Retrieved 2 August 2024.
  3. ^ Moonis Mirza; Madhur Verma; Soumya S. Sahoo; Sanjay Roy; Rakesh Kakkar; Dinesh K. Singh (2023). "India's Multi-Sectoral Response to Oxygen Surge Demand during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review". Indian Journal of Community Medicine. 48 (1): 31–40. doi:10.4103/ijcm.ijcm_665_22. PMC 10112770. PMID 37082381.
  • Delete: The person's biography doesn't indicate any notability. Routine career and education coverage that reads like a resume of any mediocre official. The 3 articles noted by Tsarivan613 all mention the official as the one who is a part of the Indian Health organization. They don't actually highlight his special role of something really important he did during Covid-19 except for being elected as a supervisor in a specific region. Obviously too early for a separate Wikipedia page. 50.46.167.81 (talk) 00:22, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 21:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LineLab (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Relatively new product where the only sources about its uses are by the original creators; some third party sources are not relevant as they do not discuss the software. Page was previously tagged by @Chaotic Enby and Jlwoodwa: for promotional tone and other issues. Tags were removed without a significant change in tone, and without adding sources to demonstrate notability. I find nothing in Google search except the company itself, so it is time for an AfD. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:39, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

East African Air (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I haven’t found any sources, and the sources only show an 404 error. And the doing research I only find articles about an private airline from Kenya, so it’s probably a hoax. Protoeus (talk) 21:12, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baloch yakjehti committee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Questionable notability per WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Note that this appears to be a rewrite of a declined draft about the same organization by the same author: Draft:Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC). The same issues regarding formal tone appropriate for an encyclopedia noted as problematic in the declined draft seem to afflict this version. Geoff | Who, me? 22:59, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 23:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. It does meet GNG; the sources just aren't in the article.
Source assessment table: prepared by User:CFA
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://www.dawn.com/news/1845830/baloch-yakjehti-committee-postpones-sit-in-after-agreement-with-govt Yes Yes Listed on WP:NPPSG as reliable Yes About the organization Yes
https://theprint.in/world/pakistan-baloch-yakjehti-committee-establishes-central-organising-body-mahrang-baloch-chosen-central-organiser/2131286/ Yes Yes Listed on WP:NPPSG as reliable Yes About the organization Yes
https://m.thewire.in/article/south-asia/a-baloch-national-gathering-against-enforced-disappearances-and-human-rights-abuses/amp Yes Yes Listed on WP:NPPSG as generally reliable Yes About the organization Yes
https://www.geo.tv/latest/556473-baloch-yakjehti-committee-sit-in-enters-third-day Yes ~ Listed on WP:NPPSG as "leaning towards reliable" Yes About the organization ~ Partial
https://www.newsx.com/world/baloch-yakjehti-committee-to-run-endbalochgenocide-campaign-against-pakistan-atrocities/ Yes Yes Not listed anywhere, but no reason to assume it's not reliable Yes About the organization Yes
https://www.aninews.in/news/world/asia/byc-urges-rights-body-to-intervene-amid-escalating-abuses-in-balochistan20240724190635 Yes ~ No consensus on reliability Yes About the organization ~ Partial
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/baloch-yakjehti-committee-criticises-pakistan-for-atrocities-against-people-of-balochistan/articleshow/111632036.cms Yes ~ No consensus on reliability Yes About the organization ~ Partial
https://www.lokmattimes.com/international/baloch-yakjehti-committee-steps-up-efforts-for-national-gathering/ Yes Yes Not listed anywhere, but no reason to assume it's not reliable Yes About the organization Yes
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
That is a source assessment based on significant coverage by major news outlets. Even if we discount the non-listed or no-consensus sources, there are still three reliable sources that offer significant coverage. They just need to be added to the article when it is rewritten. C F A 💬 23:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources like ANI and Times of India are not reliable for the topic. WP:RSPANI Look here for further information. Any India related news site is unreliable when it comes to political topics about Pakistan as the govt has vested interest involved. Other sources do exist but they fail to demonstrate WP:SIGCOV as of now. Axedd (talk) 00:26, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, which is why I marked them as "No consensus" on the chart above. There are still at least 3 reliable, independent sources that offer significant coverage of the organization, which shows that it meets WP:NORG. We can't say something fails GNG just because other unreliable sources happen to have also covered the topic. C F A 💬 00:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello user:CFA. Can you add the above recent sources, plus Amnesty International, Arab News and The Diplomat, to your table as well? They need to be added to the article also. Balochpal (talk) 16:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question: as per the Voice of America, a reliable and authentic source, the Baloch Long March was a past event, not a present event, that happened months ago. (The Al Jazeera news doesn't event mention the long march when discussing the BYC). How would you use it to cover the broader topic of the whole BYC? VoA: Late last year, BYC led a 1,600-kilometer march to Islamabad with families awaiting the return of their loved ones gone missing in the fight between the state and Baloch separatists. Protesters faced severe police action as they tried to enter the capital. Demonstrators, braving the cold for days, eventually left after authorities warned of an imminent security threat. Balochpal (talk) 14:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Opinions offered for Keep, Merge and Deletion closures. But I haven't seen a good response to the results in the source analysis table that indicate that GNG is established by a sufficient number of sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Educational Basketball (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Disputed draftification, whcih leaves AfD as the route for articles with insufficient referencing and failing WP:GNG. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:45, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Farm Credit Bank of Texas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Haven't managed to find a single independent piece offering significant coverage. There are a few trivial namedrops here and there and that's about it. C F A 💬 19:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kingo Root (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Same as previous AfD (Possibly malware, few and unreliable sources, written somewhat like an ad) – The Sharpest Lives (💬✏️ℹ️) (ping me!) 16:59, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD, so Soft Deletion is not an option. To the nominator, your nomination is seen as your vote, please do not vote additional times.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep CNET from 2016 and DigitalTrends are reliable according to RSP. 1/4 of the content is devoted to the malware suspicions so I don't see how it's writen like an ad, nor is "possibly malware" a valid deletion rationale. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denny Draper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Only secondary sources in the article and found during WP:BEFORE check are match reports with surface level coverage of the subject. AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (contributor). I tried improving this to bring it back to mainspace, based on elements of BASIC per SPORTBASIC (the guidelines that covers the notability of people and athletics), as a combination of secondary sources, rather than the need for exclusive SIGCOV (the guidelines that covers the notability of general topics). So far there is Sky Sports and BBC for this, which I believe is beyond trivial, and borderline BASIC per Govvy comment. It's otherwise unfortunately that the BBC's Women's Football Show episodes are no longer available, as I remember distinct post-game coverage of Draper after her initial goal; that of her international career, prospects and style of play (beyond ROUTINE), that would certainly cross the threshold for basic notability (people and sports-related). I'll try find a copy of this somewhere to see if it could be used as a cite av media ref, even if not possible as an online source. I think it's also fair to assume basic based on "they have achieved success in a major international competition at the highest level", that of being top scorer in the U17 Euro qualifying, as subjectively the U17 Euros are the highest level of competition at that age range, though I can understand how this is intended for senior competitions only, as well as only a guide to likelihood of notability, as opposed to notability itself. Either way, it wouldn't be too much of a loss if the page get's deleted, as I suspect there will be SIGCOV soon enough for it to return. It would be unfortunate for an active WSL player to have their page deleted, but based on policy/coverage it'd be understandable. I can only assume it's age-related as to why there isn't further coverage, given she would be one of the very few active WSL players to have scored a league goal and not have an article. CNC (talk) 16:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Have added a third source for notability [1], so per above comment, that should cover SPORTBASIC. The online source is unavailable, but can be verified here, or otherwise by requesting archival footage from the BBC for non-commercial purposes if preferred (but otherwise nothing wrong with citing media as RS per WP:PUBLISHED). I realise as well that ROUTINE only covers local sources for sport, so with BBC and Sky Sports, game coverage counts for multiple sig cov. At least, I think it's hard to argue that coverage of scoring the winning goal in an important game isn't significant. We can get round to the YT argument if needed, but as it's a verified account from a reliable source (Sky Sports Football) it is "inheriting their level of reliability" per WP:RSPYOUTUBE so shouldn't be needed. CNC (talk) 17:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Routine is definitely not restricted to local sources; per policy: For example, routine news coverage of announcements, events, sports, or celebrities, while sometimes useful, is not by itself a sufficient basis for inclusion of the subject of that coverage. NSPORT's requirement that local sources cannot be routine game coverage does not mean only local sources can be routine game coverage. The video is primary and does not contain encyclopedic coverage: it is routine match commentating and amounts to no more than a sentence or two at most: absolutely not SIGCOV. If this was sufficient for NSPORT purposes we would have articles on every DI and probably DII college football player. JoelleJay (talk) 23:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the reasons stated above, but also worth adding here that Draper recently signed a pro contract with Leicester. Until now, her WSL appearances had been as an academy player mostly coming off the bench, so reasonable chance of her making match day squads more often. Delete this article and we could end up having to restore it long before Christmas. Leonstojka (talk) 17:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. There is no instance of WP:SIGCOV in an independent, reliable source as required under WP:NSPORT, and thus the subject also fails WP:GNG which requires multiple instances. Sourcing is limited to WP:ROUTINE match coverage, stats pages, and coverage in affiliated sources. Per a "keep" voter's assertion that she may become more notable in the future given her career prospects, I would be open to a "draftify" outcome if others believe that would be productive; ping me if so and I'll reconsider my current !vote. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:50, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify as this appears to be the case that notability is not quite there, but due to the age of the subject and current state of the article, 'sufficient' notability could exist within the next year. C679 10:55, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Space Launch System (Turkey) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable enough to have its own article. No objection if anyone merges it into Space program of Turkey as an alternative to deletion Chidgk1 (talk) 19:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eatliz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Violently Delicate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delicately Violent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Teasing Nature (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable band. Searches show up only one newspaper article, and most links to their music on various streaming sites. (Note: searching for the band's name in Hebrew is practically impossible, since their Hebrew name just means "butcher shop", according to Google translate). WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idaho Freedom Caucus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NORG. All coverage I can find is either routine and trivial. The best article available is this short routine AP piece about starting it. Most other coverage focuses on members of the caucus with trivial namedrops. WP:ORGTRIV applies here. C F A 💬 17:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kerry Chen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Non-notable entrepreneur who lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them. Promo article. Fjnat (talk) 16:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete: No effective references to establish notability. No sign of independent sigcov. The subject has NOT received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

1).None of the references cited in the article are reliable sources and most of them are written in a promotional tone, especially the Chinese ones.
2).The "Fortune China's 40 Under 40 List" is NOT published by Fortune Magazine, but by the Chinese version of the magazine. The Chinese version of the magazine is far less reliable than that of the English version. The "Fortune China's 40 Under 40 List" is far less influential and recognizable than that of the Fortune Magazine's 40 under 40 List. Being included on the "Fortune China's 40 Under 40 List" doesn't establish notability. As for the rest of the nominations and awards, they do even less to establish notability.
3).A further in-depth search also failed to show any reliable, independent secondary sources about him. Fjnat (talk) 12:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are the nominator and your nomination statement is your deletion comment/vote. You cannot vote twice. Closing admin please take note of this. Ednabrenze (talk) 20:47, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep it passes notability guidelines. This reporting by China Daily [3] and this from China News Network [4] are reliable and significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. Aadditionally, the subject has been listed in the Fortune China 40 Business Elites Under 40 and has also appeared in the Shanghai Top Ten Internet Entrepreneurs as well as being nominated for Green China Person of the Year 2020-2021. These are significant business notability particularly in China – a country of over a billion people. The Fortune China 40 Business Elites Under 40 is credible, reliable and notable in China and all count for the subject’s notability. Teto Amo (talk) 18:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You are the creator of the article and it's no surprise that you voted to keep it. The content of the China Daily story is clearly promotional. Both China Daily and China News Network have low reputations and little reliability. None of them are reliable and significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. Fjnat (talk) 07:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Being selected as one of the "Top 10 Internet Entrepreneurs in Shanghai" and being nominated for "Green China Person of the Year" doesn't mean anything. They don't matter at all because their influence is insignificant. The "Fortune China's 40 Under 40 List" is far less influential and recognizable than that of the Fortune Magazine's 40 Under 40 List. More importantly, the "Fortune China's 40 Under 40 List" is a commercialized project, and any Chinese entrepreneur under the age of 40 can apply on his or her own by filling out the form. Therefore, being included on the "Fortune China's 40 Under 40 List" doesn't establish notability. Fjnat (talk) 11:18, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It’s really funny to see you using such discriminatory and offensive language. Moreover, I think you might not know how the internal process system of Under40 works.First of all, while the platform does allow for public submissions, it is not open to just anyone, so please don’t confuse the facts. There are certain thresholds for financing, profitability, and even the requirement for having outstanding products in the industry. Whether it’s Forbes or Fortune in China, or any regional version, they all adhere to principles of fairness and justice. It’s not about buying a spot on the list with money or getting selected by just filling out a form. I hope the editor can understand that international media groups have very strong principles of media integrity, regardless of the country. The list itself does not involve any fees, and only if additional sponsorship is required after the list is produced will there be any business expenses. For more information, please check the link below:FAQ link 114.45.26.245 (talk) 15:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Overall, the subject has not received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Fjnat (talk) 13:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep before search and review of the cited references show WP:SIGCOV in independent reliable secondary sources. Runmastery (talk) 09:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Forbes has become deprecated. Does not pass GNG. Bearian (talk) 00:47, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no mention of Forbes in the article and Forbes is not cited as reference in it. Could you please point out the Forbes that has become deprecated and rendered the subject of the article non notable? You may need to review the article and its sources again. The 40 under 40 listed in the article comes from Fortune Magazine not Forbes. I think this is an oversight on your part given your experience as a former admin. Ednabrenze (talk) 05:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have to point out that "The 40 Under 40" listed in the article IS NOT from Fortune Magazine but Fortune China (the Chinese version of the magazine). The Chinese version of the magazine is far less reliable than that of the English version. The 40 Under 40 List in the article is actually the "Fortune China's 40 Under 40 List". Fjnat (talk) 08:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it was an oversight on Bearian's part, as he is an experienced lawyer, teacher, and Wikipedia user. He has become worried, as of July 2024, that certain sources cited are not as reliable as they used to be. In particular, Who's Who, Forbes, and the "Grey Lady" have made editorial decisions that make them less reliable than even four years ago [5]. Bearian is worried about RS, especially Forbes. The first sentence expresses his concern about the reliability of Forbes, and the second sentence is his opinion that the subject Does not pass GNG. I agree with Bearian that the subject does not pass GNG. And I think his opinion is important because the subject does not appear in RS. Fjnat (talk) 13:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t quite understand why this editor differentiates between Fortune and Fortune China, and then directly claims that their information is unreliable. I’d like to ask: would you differentiate between Fortune and Fortune Middle East or UK and say that they are unreliable? Fortune is a reputable global media group, and they establish branches in different countries to delve into regional issues. According to the editor’s perspective, does that mean other versions are unreliable and only the main Fortune is credible? This is my concern. 114.45.26.245 (talk) 16:36, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I checked the website of Fortune, and their own site is very clear about these matters [[6]]. I wonder if this editor has a bias against China, to the point where they believe that any news coming from China is unreliable, even if it’s from international media's Chinese editions. This attitude seems to reflect a lack of understanding. After all, foreign media in China is neither controlled by the government nor by commercial interests. 114.45.26.245 (talk) 16:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have added a new citation[7] from Reuters. Other editors and admins please take note of the new citation. The subject is mentioned at least 12 times in this latest citation and helps strengthen its WP:GNG. Teto Amo (talk) 16:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 17:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Kabiri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not seeing how they satisfy WP:NPOL. He only served as a "deputy of cooperative affairs in the Ministry of Cooperation, Labor and Social Welfare". Does not meet WP:GNG at best. Jamiebuba (talk) 15:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 17:25, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Immers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Immers fails GNG with a lack of SIGCOV. The sources are more focused on Steven van de Velde than Immers. Dougal18 (talk) 12:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect even after the improvements my Commonsense this still lacks Notability as it only came from one source, which I still don't know if it is WP:RS Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:24, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The premise of the AfD is that Immers' connection to someone notable (van de Velde) does not make Immers notable - arguing that someone else is notable is not a !keep argument, let alone a strong one. Kingsif (talk) 22:11, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Immers has now consistent top ten placements in the European Championships, World Championships and the Olympics, so he clearly belongs to a very narrow elite in his sport. His European championship title as a junior may not be enough in itself (I and BabbaQ have expanded the article considerably since most people here argued for redirect) but even that is important in the big picture, how consistent this player has been throughout his career. The argument to keep has nothing to do with the global infamy resulting from his association to van de Velde. As a beach volley player he is equally notable in his own right as van de Velde is in that regard. Commonssense (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 17:25, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strongly oppose redirect: Matthew Immers has played on a high level with a number different people (such as Yorick de Groot, together with whom he won silver at the 2018 Summer Youth Olympics). It is common in beach volleyball to play with multiple partners during ones career. To redirect him to one specific partner is not very helpful. In particular when that specific partners fame is based on the combination of being an Olympian and a convicted child rapists. There is no sports reason to redirect Immers to van de Velde rather than the other way around. The only reason would be that van de Velde is more famous due to being a convicted child rapists. Since Immers is not a convicted child rapists having a redirect that way seems like an (unintentional) character assassination. As per Geschichte and others I would prefer keep due to his results as a player. Gunnar Larsson (talk) 19:28, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Netherlands_at_the_2024_Summer_Olympics#Volleyball. I struggle to see more that routine coverage and no coverage that is focused on the subject. --Enos733 (talk) 20:57, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Honoré Lechasseur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a character so incredibly obscure that I didn't even know we had an article on this guy until today, somehow has two separate notability tags on his article, and is lucky to receive two pageviews a day according to statistics. A source search yields quite literally nothing except for the books the character starred in. There is no coverage on this character, and is better off being redirected towards Time Hunter, the series in which the character stars. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:24, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zaur Darabzada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. Significant coverage in secondary reliable sources is lacking. There is not a fact in the person's activities that would make him notable. Being a member of the Board of Directors of CinemaPlus alone does not make a person notable. Also, this article was deleted from azwiki as a result of a discussion and was subsequently requested for restoration several times. Additionally, the article was previously created under the name "Zaur Darabzadeh" on enwiki, then deleted, and after its deletion, the article name was protected due to repeatedly recreating attempts. Sura Shukurlu (talk) 16:46, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Goh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO, WP:NAUTHOR, WP:NPROF and WP:GNG. I can't find a single reliable secondary source on him, and this version of the article (recreated in May 2024) is sourced only by press releases and the author's own works. I could find no independent reviews of any of his books in a WP:BEFORE search, and nothing remarkable about his academic career. His press releases says he was a visiting/emeritus professor at the now-defunct California International Business University in the US (which appears to have a been a visa mill), South-West State University in Russia, and an online outfit called "SABI University" in France which appears to be a degree mill.

Outcome of the last AFD was to draftify per creator's request in April 2019. The draft was abandoned, and deleted in March 2021. Editors searching for significant coverage, please note that there is an unrelated Singaporean film producer with this name, and an unrelated Malaysian athlete. Wikishovel (talk) 16:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYWC-AM (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously deleted and salted as DYWC * Pppery * it has begun... 16:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dujon Dujonar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NFILM, without reviews in independent, reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG as well, coverage is limited to WP:PRIMARYSOURCES and tabloid coverage disallowed per WP:SBST. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BridgeWay Station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Recreated by a now-blocked sock after prior soft deletion in 2023. Fails to meet WP:GNG, WP:NBUILD with significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dandenong West Football Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested redirect (courtesy @Nyttend:) and N/C a year ago at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dandenong Football and Netball Club, but still no evidence of independent sourcing leading to notability for this team. Star Mississippi 13:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's a few non-AFL club articles which are pretty rundown and poorly maintained, I've just done some work fixing this one and there's plenty of independent news coverage about it Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 00:24, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (or delete, either would be appropriate) The references added since the original nomination all fall under the banner of WP:LOCALCOVERAGE (since most are from the local council newspaper) or non-independent sources. There are two references to the club from the website of the Herald Sun, which ostensibly meets the threshold of being a major statewide newspaper – but a closer look would suggest that those are both the 'Local Footy' section of the newspaper's website, which tends to be an online mirror of affiliated council newspapers – plus they're quite WP:ROUTINE. On the balance of everything I don't think it quite meets a GNG hurdle. Aspirex (talk) 12:05, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rakesh Varre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, WP:NACTOR (with only one significant role in a notable film). The available sources are all tabloid coverage under WP:SBST and/or of questionable reliability under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Repeatedly recreated by UPE/COI editors. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:36, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom; no evidence of notability. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Henry Long (speedway rider) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT, only primary sources provided. Nothing found when searching ["Henry Long " speedway] LibStar (talk) 03:11, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 14:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matúš Viedenský (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article fails WP:GNG without significant coverage. The closest news source I found regarding him is SME which mentions that he has a brother named Marek. ⋆。˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚。⋆ 13:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Swissôtel Amsterdam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Google news search yields hardly anything. 2 of the 3 sources merely confirm winning a non notable award, in any case the sources are primary. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(supports notability) Stadsnieuws. DE NIEUWE LUNCHROOM. "Het nieuws van den dag : kleine courant". Amsterdam, 11-05-1901, p. 3. Geraadpleegd op Delpher op 06-08-2024, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010128190:mpeg21:p003
(supports notability) Lunchroom. "De Tijd : godsdienstig-staatkundig dagblad". 's-Hertogenbosch, 12-05-1901, p. 6. Geraadpleegd op Delpher op 06-08-2024, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010407942:mpeg21:p006
(data only, not notability) Vervolg Nieuwstijdingen. STADSNIEUWS St-Nicolaas-wandelingen.. "De Tijd : godsdienstig-staatkundig dagblad". 's-Hertogenbosch, 05-12-1896, p. 4. Geraadpleegd op Delpher op 06-08-2024, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010991206:mpeg21:p004
(data only, not notability) Stadsnieuws. Officieele Kennisgeving.. "Het nieuws van den dag : kleine courant". Amsterdam, 10-04-1901, p. 10. Geraadpleegd op Delpher op 06-08-2024, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010128163:mpeg21:p010
gidonb (talk) 07:02, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please translate these? LibStar (talk) 07:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just stick it in auto translate. Like any other editor. No need to reply to every opinion that makes a different proposal. Each respondent will reach their own conclusion. Of course, I thoroughly read the intro, and had already taken it into full account when drawing my own conclusions. gidonb (talk) 14:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are images of newspaper clips so can't stick them in autotranslate. " No need to reply to every opinion that makes a different proposal." I am merely seeking clarification which is permitted. LibStar (talk) 00:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(data only, not notability) AMSTERDAM. "De morgenpost". Amsterdam, 02-08-1902, p. 2. Geraadpleegd op Delpher op 06-08-2024, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMSAA06:165560029:mpeg21:p00002
Notability supporting new RS: [8][9][10][11]. Do note that the range of coverage is 2021-1896=125 years. gidonb (talk) 01:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 12:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pure (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP: N. There are some AfDs in the past that mostly made arguments that weren't based on Wikipedia policy (plus some off-site canvassing). There is a short article in iX about the language, but this alone isn't enough to meet notability guidelines. If voting Keep, please provide sources that are reliable and substantially more than a few sentences about the language -- there needs to be enough to write an actual article. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:55, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The iX article is fine, but the ACM paper (An LLVM backend for GHC) only mentions Pure in a list of other languages that use LLVM (Pure: A functional programming language based on term rewriting. Pure uses LLVM as a just-in-time compiler.), and the LAC2009 paper (Signal Processing in the Pure Programming Language) is by Albert Gräf so it's not independent. Looking at other citations of Gräf's papers, I couldn't find any that discussed Pure in depth - it's sometimes mentioned as an example of a term-rewriting language but only in passing. It was a nice design and somewhat unusual when it came out, but I don't think it meets GNG. Adam Sampson (talk) 14:32, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Rewriting - I think the best outcome here is probably one or two sentences on the language in a new paragraph inserted under Rewriting#Term rewriting systems#Use in programming languages. I agree with Adam Sampson's assessment of the sources, and it seems like there's been almost no uptake of the language in either academia or industry in the last 10 years (which would make me want to ignore the lack of WP:SIGCOV). I do think this should likely exist as a redirect, and I'm not confident my proposal is the best; there's some argument for expanding its discussion on LLVM or for including a sentence in Pattern matching instead. Happy to keep instead if there are sources I missed. Suriname0 (talk) 17:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any support for Suriname0's proposal? Any better redirect targets? In cases of marginal sourcing, an ATD can be the best approach.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 12:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to other articles in the Career achievements of basketball players category, this is a collection of indiscriminate trivia with trivial statistical cross sections, which is a violation of WP:NOTSTATS and does not meet the notability criteria under WP:NLIST. The most pertinent info is already included in the main article. Let'srun (talk) 00:58, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep unless there's a solid reason to delete it beyond being statistics-heavy. Kareem is one of the sport's greatest players, something which has drawn extremely extensive commentary, so I don't think this is really indiscriminate.
jp×g🗯️ 21:00, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Right now, there is no consensus. Let's see if a relisting helps.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Colons_and_asterisks#Best_practices says to use things like ":::" or "***", not a mixture. If the reply tool is doing something else, then it's faulty in a minor way. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2024 (UTC) [reply]
There's a mixed example there showing *****: sixth reply.—Bagumba (talk) 22:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 12:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Armoured One (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Looks like not meeting NCORP, no reliable media. BoraVoro (talk) 12:25, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fight Dem Back (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Can only find trivial mentions of this website/group. Traumnovelle (talk) 10:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Alexeyevitch(talk) 12:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 12:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NRT News (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Even though the acceptance of WP:TNT is very far from universal, I think this article is of such a low quality that deletion on this ground is reasonable. The article is short and disorganized, the phrasing is unencyclopedic, and it cites just one relevant source. Is this article suitable for an encyclopedia in its current state? No. Is its current state useful as a starting point for improvement? Again, no. Janhrach (talk) 09:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of electoral firsts in New Zealand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NLIST. Closest thing I can find is this: [12]. Ultimately this is WP:LISTCRUFT with no reliable source dictating which 'firsts' are notable and worthy of inclusion. All MPs are presumed notable so having them be notable by other characteristics typically involves original research. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth Edward Gentry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Complaint on talk page from 2017 that notability has not been demonstrated. -- Beland (talk) 06:21, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sivaiah Potla (Surgeon) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a non-notable orthopedic and surgeon that does not meet WP:GNG. Sources are PR and paid pieces. Jamiebuba (talk) 15:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:21, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balalin Theater Troupe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks notability, significance. Not much found when search performed on Google etc. Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:49, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:20, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol-intensive brand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Some kinda essay or dictionary definition, not an encyclopedia article. I am also nominating these pages for the same reason: Icon brand & Cult brand. Polygnotus (talk) 07:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the "See also" in your nomination is somewhat confusing. For clarification, I would recommend changing it to something a long the lines of "I am also nominating these pages for the same reason" -1ctinus📝🗨 17:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@1ctinus: Thanks!  Fixed Polygnotus (talk) 20:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete: The one possibly reliable source I could find is this: [13], a scholarly article that uses the concept extensively. Additionally, I can find a Forbes Contributor article (which does not count for notability): [14], and an interview with the professor who coined the term: [15]. These are either unreliable or non-independent. If anyone could find one additional independent source, I would change my delete to a keep. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is a suggestion on the AFD for Cult brand to Merge this article to that one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cult brand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Some kinda essay or dictionary definition, not an encyclopedia article. I am also nominating these pages for the same reason: Icon brand & Symbol-intensive brand. Polygnotus (talk) 07:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there support for a possible Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kelman's source characteristics (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't appear to meet WP:N or have a good WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 15:22, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:39, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=kelman+compliance+identification+internalization. It seems like this concept is pretty notable in the communications literature, with Kelman's original paper having over 6,000 citations. However, that doesn't change that this article needs to be renamed and rewritten from scratch (in my opinion). Mathwriter2718 (talk) 12:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seneb-Neb-Af (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can only find sources and content unduly taking about mastaba. If there should be ATD, then redirect. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 12:43, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Red Ink Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable award. References are all announcements of winners and the majority are unreliable, falling under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. A WP:BEFORE was unable to locate significant coverage that talks about the reward itself. CNMall41 (talk) 03:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Awards, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 03:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but move: It looks like these should be written as "RedInk Awards". I don't see WP:NEWSORGINDIA really applying here: These are awarded by the Mumbai Press Club, so any reporting is unlikely to be paid. Coverage of almost any journalism award is going to be a little iffy on independence due to sources written by journalists with personal and organisational interests, memberships, and possibly voting participation (although these ones are juried). If the Mumbai Press Club had an article -- and I'm not sure it should -- I'd be happy with a merge to section. In the absence of that ATD, because there is post-event reporting in national sources and the awards presenters have included a Chief Justice of India, a State Governor, a State Chief Minister, and a federal Minister (indicating a particular level of repute)[16][17][18][19][20], and it's reasonable for the awards to [continue to] be listed at recipients' articles and this list article facilitates interlinking, I'm landing on retention (possibly slight WP:IAR). ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 13:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking for a good redirect as an WP:ATD but unfortunately one does not exists. "Press Trust of India" and "News Express Service" bylines fit the definition of NEWSORGINDIA 100% though. I am wondering which ones you feel do not fall under that criteria as I would be happy to go back and look (I may have missed something). I think it would be more of WP:ATA as opposed to WP:IAR. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need to hear from more editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sophia Moestrup (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Last AfD almost 7 years ago was no consensus. I don't think she meets WP:BIO or WP:PROF. LibStar (talk) 04:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Willy Decker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Questionable notability. I could find limited sources with a Google search to satisfy the inline citations template. Therefore probably fails WP:GNG. TrueCRaysball 💬|✏️ 02:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relistings. More opinions would be welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:35, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marko Čarapić (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

6 out of the 7 citations are for Google Books, and I see no inherent notability. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I also don't follow the deletion rationale. Coverage in a few books is very respectable if the coverage is significant. Are you stating you'd prefer a mention on a website to a book?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:33, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per Боки. Nvss132 (talk) 18:39, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yorktel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of notability established with WP:RS Amigao (talk) 03:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources are unreliable? BarnyardWill (talk) 21:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please inform me as to why this is being flagged for deletion? The page is written from an neutral point of view BarnyardWill (talk) 17:49, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. The deletion rationale is stated under the article name.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P-GRADE Portal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article lacks of WP:GNG, since it is a project of cloud infrastructure in grid computing with little overall impact and very few available sources, mostly self-published sources of the authors of this project. It seems there are a few other project-related articles that are related to the Institute for Computer Science and Control (SZTAKI) of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences that seem to lack considerably WP:GNG as well. Recently, other related articles have been already deleted: [21] and [22]. The targetted articles, like this nomination, GUSE, and the deleted article of MTA SZTAKI Laboratory of Parallel and Distributed Systems, were all created by the same user many years ago. Chiserc (talk) 07:49, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:34, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:27, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lynn Davis (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. A lot of this article relies on Discogs links, leading to a timeline of album appearances or background vocal appearances. The proclaimed singles "I Want You for Myself", "Indigo Waltz", and anything else mentioned does not list her as the singer or featured singer. Furthermore, this articles fails WP:SINGER. There is a dead "Billboard World Music" link which simply stated the release of her song "Can I Come Over" but it never charted. Everything else is unsourced and there are sources available to support the information in the article. Sackkid (talk) 04:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Luigi video games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article seems to be highly OR in terms of what is considered a "Luigi video game." A quick BEFORE yields little to no results for an overarching series bar Luigi's Mansion, which seems to be notable as a separate series. However, every other entry just happens to be every time Luigi starred in a game, with no clear reasoning as to if it's meant to count as a "series" or not. (As no source I can find links together a Game & Watch Luigi game and Mario is Missing! to any of Luigi's later solo games, for example) The Luigi's Mansion series seems notable, but every other entry this list doesn't seem to have the citations needed to really verify that they're part of a series of video games, nor do they verify that these games are even notable as a group beyond starring Luigi in them. The current article feels very unneeded, given there's nothing claiming notability for this being a notable sub-category of games, and a grouping of video games that just so happen to star a notable character just doesn't hold water. Even if the article were to be focused on Luigi's Mansion, it would need a complete TNT. This list feels better off deleted, with a Luigi's Mansion series article being made if editors find that the subject can be made into a separate article, but the concept of "Luigi video games" just doesn't seem to hold weight as either a series or as a notable sub-collection of videogames. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - I could definitely see this as a useful article. The reader (mainly gamers) would be able to tell which games are more focused on Luigi even if there is no leading "Luigi" title for game (ex. Mario Is Missing!). However I do think it should be created once there were more 15 installments, rather than 9. I feel like it leads more on the Luigi's Mansion series for notability. Sackkid (talk) 04:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    These are definitely a lot of my problems with the current list. There's very few entries, most are unrelated to each other bar a shared protagonist, and it leans heavily on the Luigi's Mansion series as it's the only really notable "series" there. If people want to see what games Luigi featured in, his navbox is still there (Even if that also needs work) or, at worst, this article could be lightly merged into Luigi's article, so that way those interested in seeing Luigi's starring games can find them there. (Not my preferred outcome, but definitely an idea if people feel it worthwhile). Outside of the Luigi connection, these games don't really hold much water as a group, and a guy starring in a set of games does not make that subcategory of games separately notable. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:37, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Are we really claiming the Luigi games aren't a spinoff? Seriously? Nintendo even did a Year of Luigi promo which is currently a Good Article. While it's not as large a sub-series as Mario, trying to deny it exists boggles the mind and we certainly aren't hard-up for hard drive space that would necessitate folding it into the Mario series. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 04:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I literally cannot find sources indicating it exists under one banner, and outside of Luigi's Mansion, the only separate game series I can find relating to Luigi is Mario & Luigi, which is a separate series and not entirely focused on Luigi. As it currently stands, the list is just a miscellaneous assortment of games starring Luigi with no verification of the series' own separate notability. Compare this to something like Wario (series) or List of Yoshi video games, which have multiple successful series that can be verified even with a quick Google search. You are right in saying that these games are spin-offs, but they aren't really tied together in a way that shows inherent notability bar happening to be associated with Luigi.
    As a note, Year of Luigi doesn't really focus on the Luigi games as one series, with the games released under that year being variations of pre-existing games. Dr. Luigi is a spin-off of the Dr. Mario series, Mario & Luigi: Dream Team is a single entry of the wider Mario & Luigi series, and the various Luigi "remixes" are just variations of pre-existing games. There was a focus on games having Luigi in a starring role, but trying to say that immediately makes a random collection of games notable is like saying Shadow the Hedgehog has his own series because he's had big roles in several games and had a whole year dedicated to him as well. Luigi's Mansion is really the only one here that can be uniquely verified as part of a wider, notable branch of games. A list like this is the equivalent of attempting to make a "List of Pikachu games" and just lining it up with Pikachu's assortment of unrelated spin-off games that aren't branched under one umbrella (Games, for example, like Hey You, Pikachu! and Detective Pikachu (video game) focus on the character, but are not part of an umbrella franchise starring the character like characters like Yoshi and Wario are).
    My problem with this list is not a matter of "trying to deny the Luigi games are spin-offs" or some bizarre thing like that, but rather that this list doesn't verify how the games featuring him are individually notable of the original Mario franchise, nor does it contain sourcing verifying the Luigi games as one major umbrella property like other notable Mario characters happen to have. This list is simply unverifiable. If you or anyone else can dig up sources noting these games are part of one whole umbrella, with notability and description inherently separate from the Year of Luigi or the Luigi character, then I'd be happy to withdraw since I just happened to miss stuff in my search. But right now as it stands, the list just lacks the things it needs to really meet guidelines and justify a split off any other article. I do hope this clears up my viewpoint a bit. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 05:14, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 06:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning keep but I see where the nom is coming from. Luigi is too interlinked with Mario (being his sidequick) to really rise to stand-alone Wario (series) or List of Yoshi video games status, but he's also further along than Princess Peach and Toad (Mario) (who both have several games named after them but no sub-franchise article). It seems Nintendo keeps pushing for a new stand-alone franchise, even if it's currently mostly Mansion. Since Mansion doesn't have an overarching series article yet (but could have) and instead hatnote-links to this list, I'd rather keep this list and see where Nintendo takes it, until we can decide how to best present the information. – sgeureka tc 07:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sidenote, how List of Wario video games is featured and how it is different from Wario (series) doesn't make sense to me. IgelRM (talk) 18:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is... bizarre. I didn't even know there were separate articles for both of these until now. There's a lot of content overlap there that should probably be merged, but that would require a heavy amount of editing and decision making to accomplish that's not within the scope of this AfD. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - While I can see an argument for there not really being a Luigi series, maybe there's an argument to be made about repurposing it into a Luigi's Mansion series article instead, which is more of a concrete, actual series? Just a thought, currently undecided on what to do personally. Sergecross73 msg me 15:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I do agree that something like this might have potential (specifically the potential for a Luigi's Mansion series page), but I'm also agreeing with Pokelego's stance on how to handle this. It's hard to tell what exactly a "Luigi video game" is, and this list has nothing worth saving even in the event a Luigi's Mansion series article, or something on the lines of that, is created. λ NegativeMP1 16:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Luigi's game appearance are covered on Luigi#Appearances and I think the article is below WP standards as is. But considering the Mario franchise has similar lists like List of video games featuring Mario, I don't think the scope of this AfD can resolve anything. IgelRM (talk) 18:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That list very much feels like it fails Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE given it's covering every time a video game happens to feature Mario, one of the most iconic characters of all time who is so frequently referenced and parodied that a list like this seems very useless in terms of use. It feels like it'd be better off rebranded to being a list of Mario franchise videogames, but that feels like a separate discussion that would take place outside of the scope of this AfD. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nandini Balial (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Complete lack of notability slygent (talk) 04:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kaveri–Vaigai Link Canal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:57, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Gaza Strip polio epidemic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Basically a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of Gaza humanitarian crisis.

More importantly, off all the given sources, only a single one (The National) uses the term "epidemic" in its own voice, with 2 more quoting the Gaza Health Ministry's declaration of an epidemic. RS hasn't been using the term epidemic (probably because as of now there haven't been any confirmed cases yet. There are strong fears of a coming epidemic, and polio has been found in the sewage, but thankfully no infections). At the very least the article needs to be considerably shortened, and name changed to "Polio discoveries" or something. Violates Crystal Ball. It's also not being (significantly) covered by RS on its own, but rather as part of the broader crisis. Hydromania (talk) 03:44, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Withdrawn‎. Sources presented (non-admin closure) PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nya Doxa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Swedish book publisher, zero sources I could find. As with all book publishers, finding sources is very annoying as you get swamped with the books they write, so there could be something, but if there was I could not find it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Zhu Yudong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can’t see any in depth coverage in RIS to indicate that this subject is notable. There may be sources in Chinese I didn’t manage to turn up - if not this article should go. Mccapra (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Otago (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't find any sources that talk about this flag. The current sources are a passing mention related to the designer's opinion on something else, and flags of the world which is a deprectated source. couldn't find any books, news articles, even on the council website wasn't anything. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 00:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

clarifying im not saying this flag is inaccurate just saying its not notable enough to have its own article TheLoyalOrder (talk) 00:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Very odd that it's not on the council website - it is the official flag and is flown outside their headquarters. Also not quite sure why FOTW is a deprecated source - it's still active and currently undergoing a major upgrade. I'll look for more sources. Grutness...wha? 01:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:FOTW ->Flags of the World has been written off as an unreliable source in general. Although some of its pages might refer to reliable sources, it is self-published content without editorial oversight, and the hosts "disclaim any responsibility about the veracity and accuracy of the contents of the website." TheLoyalOrder (talk) 01:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]