Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

7 October 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< October 06	October 08 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Mary Childs (journalist)

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

Does not meet WP:BASIC. The New York Times source, a book review, is the only secondary and independent source and it doesn't quite show notability for the book – and not at all for its author. bonadea contributions talk 17:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Journalism. bonadea contributions talk 17:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Finance. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yihua Zheng

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

Nothing to indicate that WP:NPROF is met, nor WP:BASIC. A WP:BEFORE search yielded nothing. Was draftified for a chance to develop it, but instead it was moved back to mainspace with no changes. bonadea contributions talk 17:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Science. bonadea contributions talk 17:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mecklenburgian invasion of Sweden

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

Delete as WP:COPYVIO. The article is a direct translation of Sundberg 2010's entry for this war, with some selection of content (some sentences/paragraphs are not included). See the article talk page for an example. I can provide more comparisons if needed. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 17:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Germany, Norway, and Sweden. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 17:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Garrett (musician)

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

Session drummer where sourced pointing to notability have not been available since 2010. Karst (talk) 16:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Karst (talk) 16:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dainik Shiksha

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

The article shows zero evidence of notability. Sayful Ialam (talk) 16:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Sayful Ialam (talk) 16:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Websites, and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explain that why it shows zero evidence of notability please. We also needs reasons for deletion discussion (although my feedback is mutual). Mehedi Abedin 16:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aricca Vitanza

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

This article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines as there are insufficient reliable sources to establish its significance. Additionally, the content appears promotional. I propose deletion based on WP:GNG (General Notability Guideline) and WP:NOTPROMOTION.

This person is not notable enough to warrant a wikipedia page. The historical background of this person is mostly heresay, there does not exist any sources to verify the claims. Whatever links there are are broken or dead.

This is a flagrant self-promotional page. It does not attain the standards wikipedia holds in order to merit an article. 47.153.182.90 (talk) 18:36, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Completing nomination on behalf of IP nominator--above text is copypasted from this page's talk page. I am neutral at this time. To the nominator: Better to leave your deletion rationale on the article's talk page and to request completion of the nomination at WT:AFD where more people will see it. --Finngall ^talk 15:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Italy, and California. Shellwood (talk) 16:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mavişehir railway station

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

Tagged as uncited almost a year ago. I could not find enough good sources to show it to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 15:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manga (album)

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

As we now have Manga+ (also uncited) do we still need this? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why would you want to delete the full album of a well-known, chart topper band? If you have issues reagrding sources, put the respective template on the article. just because this isn't an American band, doesn't mean the album isn't notable. Go read about maNga. Xia ^{talk to me} 16:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added sources. It's a gold disc album that also won a top music award for the band. Xia ^{talk to me} 17:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Braudy (art dealer)

AfDs for this article:

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

Sources are all connected to the subject or are not significant coverage – fails GNG. The previous AFD mentioned some offline sources, but they are not accessible for verification and the descriptions of these do not seem substantive (e.g. among brief quotes from art dealers, not biographical coverage). He is now appearing on a reality show but this would not be a basis for notability (though this could be redirected there should an article for the season be created). Reywas92^Talk 15:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Arts, and Washington, D.C.. Shellwood (talk) 15:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sukanya Verma

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

Fails WP:GNG. AmericanY (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, and India. AmericanY (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FilmFreeway

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

I am unable to find WP:SIGCOV. Hardly meet WP:GNG or WP:NWEB. AmericanY (talk) 14:58, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites, Canada, and United States of America. AmericanY (talk) 14:58, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 14:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joan Lee Tu

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Joan H. Lee

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

This person does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Her master's thesis garnered a major burst of one-off media coverage, but that does not satisfy notability requirements per WP:BLP1E. WhinyTheYounger ※ Talk 14:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Language. WhinyTheYounger ※ Talk 14:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:15, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails WP:SUSTAINED, plus many of the media articles are reproductions of her University press release. Later, when she has more she can include 1-2 of the links in a page with more notability information such as publications, awards etc. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:53, 5 October 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 14:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Nothing about this person since the 2011 paper. I don't see sustained coverage and does not meet academic notability. Carpet refbombing is a thing now, Sources 3-41 are to show it's received international coverage, which is a bit excessive. I think this was a attempt at promotion, that didn't really gain traction. Oaktree b (talk) 14:54, 7 October 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.

Skew It on the Bar-B

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

Nothing I can find about this song shows that it passes WP:NSONGS. No chart positions, no certifications, only one reliable source that gives it equal weight as part of a list of multiple songs, a WP:BEFORE search could only provide me with unreliable and self-published databases/fansites. No evidence of notability to pass WP:NSONGS -- redirect to Aquemini. JeffSpaceman (talk) 14:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 15:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Hood (album)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. No indication of notability. 2 references in the article. One is a database listing (MusicBrainz). The other seems to be a fan-written analysis. See page 76: [1]. Written by someone called "BloodBoal", with some text from website movingmagemusic.com and the album booklet (primary source). Mika1h (talk) 13:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, Television, and United Kingdom. Mika1h (talk) 13:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Veronika Sabolová

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

Redirect to Slovakia at the 2010 Winter Olympics#Luge because I could not find any in-depth coverage of this female athlete to meet WP:GNG. Corresponding article on Slovak Wikipedia is also an unsourced stub. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Olympics, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jamil Kusiima Mbabazi

AfDs for this article:

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

Again fails WP:GNG and all references fail verification. Theroadislong (talk) 13:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uganda-related deletion discussions. Theroadislong (talk) 13:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

House/Wife

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

Not meeting notability criteria WP:NFF. - The9Man ^Talk 09:53, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Film, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Danis_Goulet#Career: with the sources (all or some) to indicate it was a project for Netflix, who was the writer and other details (presence of Alice Braga) (and plot line, if judged necessary). A redirect allow to preserve history and is standard in such cases (sources+notable diredtor+cast+etc) even if the project crashed. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:03, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khomlang Laman

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

No WP:SIGCOV sources were found to meet WP:GNG, and there are no multiple nationally known critical reviews to meet WP:NFILM. The article cites unreliable sources, such as YouTube and BookMyShow. GrabUp - Talk 12:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, India, and Manipur. GrabUp - Talk 12:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Abenao Elangbam#Selected filmography: lead actress. Another member of the cast has a page but plays a supporting role. Cinema of Manipur has lists of films and could be considered too but the actress seems a more appropriate target (the film is mentioned there and not in the general article). There is no List of Manipuri films for 2024. Can be redirected there later if the page is created. A redirect will allow to preserve history. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor to unreliable sources with no WP:SIGCOV, no reviews. Fails WP:NFILM. I did look into redirect to Abenao Elangbam#Filmpgraphy but this page too is poorly and unreliably sourced and would not be surprised if it makes to AFD nomination as well. RangersRus (talk) 14:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Amer

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

Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Fails WP:GNG. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Women, Politics, and Canada. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable: local politicians don't qualify under WP:NPOL, and the sources cited don't come even close to satisfying WP:GNG. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Karachi Airport Bombing

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

Fails NEVENT. no WP:INDEPTH coverage. and IMO its, WP:TOOSOOON and WP:THEREISNORUSH — Saqib (talk I contribs) 13:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Terrorism, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 13:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2024. Very rarely out of the many cases does terrorism in Pakistan get long term coverage so do what we have done with the rest and merge PARAKANYAA (talk) 13:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Significant terrorist attack effecting relations between China and Pakistan. And significant coverage is present. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- WikiCleanerMan, Every terror attack is significant but you’ve got to show how this one stands out. There have been many of attacks in Pakistan targeting Chinese interests, and most of them don’t even have standalone articles. So why is this one different? Also prove how this attack has impacted the relationship between China and Pakistan. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Galma

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

The article lacks significant coverage in reliable sources, does not demonstrate notability, and contains only minimal content (two or three lines). AstuteFlicker (talk) 12:19, 7 October 2024 (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/2024 October 7. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Bihar. Shellwood (talk) 13:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

N.M.A.M. Institute of Technology

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

Fails to meet WP:NSCHOOL. WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. There is no independent coverage. Delete or merge with NITTE as per the existing affiliation. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, India, and Karnataka. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eobacteria

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

Never accepted, and the two taxa it would have contained are junior synonyms. Not even worth merging anywhere. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:00, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Biology and Organisms. UtherSRG (talk) 12:00, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. YorkshireExpat (talk) 15:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SHM-CD

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

Not notable enough to warrant its own article. References are primary or just mentions. - The9Man ^Talk 08:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - agreed, merge content to Compact Disc. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam

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

because it likely does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for organizations. The bank's operations ceased in 1964 when it merged with the State Bank of Travancore, and there is limited independent, reliable source coverage detailing its historical significance beyond basic mentions. Without substantial secondary sources that provide significant coverage of the bank’s role or lasting impact Jiaoriballisse (talk) 11:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 13:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rather (surname in Kashmir)

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

We already have Rather as a disambiguation for people with this surname. The topic of the surname in Kashmir specifically is not notable. Fram (talk) 11:00, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Jammu and Kashmir. Fram (talk) 11:00, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I think it's rather obvious that this fails WP:NOT. Geschichte (talk) 14:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Rather, unless the content already exists there. Occidental𓍝Phantasmagoria [T/C] 17:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yosuke Nakagawa

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

Weak claim to notability with 14 games in Singapore and nothing else above amateur level, fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 10:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Japan, and Singapore. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rachid Trenidad

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

This was created in a time when playing for any national team was considered notable. It's not anymore, and the amount of significant coverage I could find about this player was zero. Match reports from Bonaire do not contribute to notability, neither does "captaining a team in an Après-Ski Tournament". Geschichte (talk) 10:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Caribbean. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Báthory family (of the Aba clan)

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

The article seems to be based primarily on original research, and the sources are genealogical papers and personal documents obtained by the article author (e.g. this source) that ultimately don't prove the existence of an independent Báthory family. They instead attempt to link the well-known Báthory to the Aba clan. As a conseuqence, the article is in parts written like an essay and by and large lacks reliable and secondary sources for key points in proving the existence of this family. One of the more crucial sources mentioned in the article, a book by Tibor Báthory-Szőny, is an apparent attempt by the author (a designer, according to everybodywiki, but not mentioned anywhere else) to personally link his own family to the Aba clan, which does this article no favors, as it certainly doesn't constitute a reliable source.
In addition to that, the article has already been discussed and deleted on huwiki (where one sysop felt confident enough calling it a "hoax", later looking through a physical copy of a source cited by the author and finding nothing on the topic) as well as on several more wikis, where it was variously deleted as a duplicate or a machine translation. Hijérovīt | ^þⰁ_č 19:02, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably an important addition for those who'd like to contribute to the AfD: the author has left some comments on the nomination on their own talk page instead of the article's. Hijérovīt | ^þⰁ_č 19:29, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Hungary. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The subject of the article is not hoax, there really was a Báthory (or Bátori) de Gagy family (from clan Aba), but it was not related to the well-known Báthory family (from clan Gutkeled). See this source [2]. However, I am not sure that the conclusions of the article are correct. According to Pál Engel's genealogical work, Miklós Sirokai came from another branch of the Aba clan. --Norden1990 (talk) 19:47, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I can't speak on the factual existence of the family itself, but the article seems like more of an essay aimed at proving genealogical ties with questionable sourcing instead of a fact-of-the-matter article that paraphrases reliable sources. I believe it would at the very least have to be rewritten from the ground up to reflect firmly established knowledge on the lineage, which makes it as good as deleted. Hijérovīt | ^þⰁ_č 21:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://hu.wikibooks.org/wiki/F%C3%A1jl:Szal%C3%A1nczy_csal%C3%A1dfa_1678.jpg Here is a photo of the genealogical table of the Báthory family, beginning with Count Péter of Aba and his son Miklós, the ancestor of the Báthory of Gágy line. This original artwork is dated 1678 and serves as a valuable historical document, illustrating the family's lineage and heritage. Kenessey Aurél (talk) 20:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Szal%C3%A1nczy_csal%C3%A1dfa.jpg Attached is a large-scale picture of the genealogical table, which allows for magnification for better visibility. Kenessey Aurél (talk) 20:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are completely wrong. However, I would like to present further evidence and academic references that underscore the separate identities and historical significance of these two families.

Distinction Between the two Báthory Families

1. Báthory Family from the Gutkeled Clan:

- This lineage traces its origins to two Swabian brothers, Gut and Kelad, who migrated to Hungary from the Stof castle, which is associated with either Staufen im Breisgau or Hohenstaufen in Württemberg.

- The Gutkeled Báthory family is traditionally divided into three branches: Somlyó, Ecsed, and Szaniszlófi. Each of these branches contributed to the political and social landscape of Hungary over the centuries, with significant figures such as Báthory István (Stephen Báthory), who served as the Prince of Transylvania and was elected King of Poland.

2. Báthory of Gagy Family from the Aba Clan:

- The second major Báthory lineage is linked to the Aba clan, descending from King Samuel Aba. This family also produced notable figures, including Miklós Báthory of Gágy (known also as Miklós of Siroka or Miklós Gereven) who was a vojvode of Transylvania from 1342-1344. [a. Herzoge. | Siebmacher: Wappenbuch | Reference Library (arcanum.com)] - The distinct genealogical [Archaeogenetic analysis revealed East Eurasian paternal origin to the Aba royal family of Hungary | bioRxiv] and historical narratives of the Aba Báthory family further illustrate their separate identity from the Gutkeled Báthory family.

Supporting Academic Sources

I would like to emphasize that the article under deletion also includes multiple academic sources and archive materials that provide evidence for the distinction between these families. Some of these sources include:

1. Acta Historica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, Volume 45, pages 115-120. This academic article explores the Hungarian noble lineages, including the Báthory family of Gágy, and their role in the political history of the region.

2. - [Báthori család. (Gágyi). | Nagy Iván: Magyarország családai | Kézikönyvtár (arcanum.com)] this is from this book: Magyarország családai czimerekkel és nemzékrendi táblákkal – Wikipédia (wikipedia.org) I would like to point out that one of the most authoritative sources on Hungarian noble families is Nagy Iván's "Magyarország családai címerekkel" ("The Families of Hungary with Coats of Arms"). This book is widely recognized as the most accurate and comprehensive reference for Hungarian genealogies. The depth of research and the historical accuracy in this work make it an essential source for understanding the distinctions between the noble families, including the Báthory families of different origins. I recommend consulting this work for reliable information on the history of Hungarian nobility.

3. -[Báthory-Szőnyi Tibor: Noblesse oblige, Báthory-Szőnyi Tibor | Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Központi Könyvtár (MNMKK) (hnm.hu) ]

[3]https://catalog.library.hnm.hu/en/record/-/record/MNMKVT351217 The book Noblesse Oblige, which is included in the collections of both the Hungarian National Museum and the British Library, provides detailed information on the Báthory of Gágy family. The author of the book is a direct descendant of the family, which adds a unique perspective and depth of knowledge to the historical account. This work is a valuable resource for understanding the lineage and distinct identity of the Báthory of Gágy, offering well-researched insights that support the differentiation between the Báthory families.

4. -[Sirokai család. (Sirokai †) | Nagy Iván: Magyarország családai | Reference Library (arcanum.com)][4]https://www.arcanum.com/hu/online-kiadvanyok/Nagyivan-nagy-ivan-magyarorszag-csaladai-1/tizedik-kotet-9475/sirokai-csalad-sirokai-9C84/ The genealogical table clearly shows that Miklós Báthory of Gágy is a descendant of Count Péter of Aba, lord of Szalánc. This lineage highlights the direct connection between the Báthory of Gágy family and the Aba clan, further supporting the distinct identity of this family in Hungarian noble history.

5. -[GAGYI LÁSZLÓ SÍRKÖVE. | Turul 1883-1950 | Kézikönyvtár (arcanum.com)][5]https://www.arcanum.com/hu/online-kiadvanyok/Turul-turul-1883-1950-1/1887-33C5/1887-3-3795/magyar-sirkovek-385B/gagyi-laszlo-sirkove-385C/ This article states that László, who was killed by the Turks, had a brother named Miklós, who served as the Voivode of Transylvania. Miklós's tombstone is one of the oldest known, and it features the ancient coat of arms of the Aba clan, providing important evidence of the family's lineage and noble heritage.

6. -[Siebmacher's grosses und allgemeines Wappenbuch 1856-1961 | Arcanum Újságok] [6]https://www.arcanum.com/hu/online-kiadvanyok/Siebmacher-siebmacher-wappenbuch-1/der-adel-von-ungarn-magyarorszag-2/csaladok-29/bathori-ii-v-gagy-880/ This article presents the great seal of the Báthory of Gágy family and explicitly states that they are descendants of the Aba clan. The seal serves as further historical evidence supporting the family's origins and distinct lineage

7. -[Báthori II. v. Gágy. | Siebmacher: Wappenbuch | Kézikönyvtár (arcanum.com)] [7]https://www.arcanum.com/hu/online-kiadvanyok/Siebmacher-siebmacher-wappenbuch-1/der-adel-von-siebenburgen-erdely-AC44/edelleute-niederer-adel-BA76/bathory-i-v-gagy-BCFE/ The same as above, but the small seal.

8. -[Báthory I., v. Gagy. | Siebmacher: Wappenbuch | Kézikönyvtár (arcanum.com)][8]https://adt.arcanum.com/hu/collection/SiebmacherWappenbuch/ This is one of the most well-known books on European heraldry, providing a detailed description and illustrations of the symbols of the Báthory of Gágy family. The book offers important insight into their heraldic heritage, further emphasizing the family's distinct identity

It is essential to recognize that until the two families are adequately distinguished in separate articles, any encyclopedic information regarding their contributions and historical contexts risks being conflated, potentially leading to misinformation. This is particularly evident in related articles, such as the one on Aba (gens), which inaccurately attributes aspects of the Aba Báthory family to the Gutkeled Báthory family.

I respectfully urge the administrators and editors involved in the deletion decision to review the sources and context provided. A comprehensive understanding of Hungarian history, particularly regarding noble lineages, is vital for maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the information presented on Wikipedia.

The attached sources are highly respected and academically credible, and they clearly support the distinctions outlined in this article. I encourage all editors to carefully review these references, as they provide well-researched evidence that is crucial for an accurate understanding of the Báthory families Kenessey Aurél (talk) 20:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep, none of the votes dispute the relevant book entries, eg Siebmacher Wappenbuch entries. Their votes seem solely rely on older version and hence are not properly motivated. Axisstroke (talk) 11:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to thank you for your support and for recognizing the absurdity of others ignoring the academic sources provided! Kenessey Aurél (talk) 12:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This decision appeared to stem from a lack of historical knowledge on the subject, which led to misunderstandings and personal biases impacting the discussion. It is very challenging to engage in productive dialogue with individuals who lack knowledge about the history involved. It is essential to approach historical topics with thorough research and an open mind to ensure accurate representation. Kenessey Aurél (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A perfect example of pure WP:OR. This would do better in a genealogical journal or forum, but WP is not the place for the author's original research and essay-like articles. --Greens vs. Blacks (talk) 15:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Friend, The deletion of this article risks leaving significant inaccuracies about the Báthory families in the encyclopedia. There are two distinct Báthory lineages that are often mistakenly treated as one. This misunderstanding persists among the readers, which makes it crucial for Wikipedia to provide clear, well-differentiated information.

The claim that this article is based on original research overlooks the fact that numerous credible academic and historical sources were used, including documents from respected archives and authoritative genealogical works! These references clearly indicate the separate identities and histories of the two Báthory families. The inclusion of sources like Nagy Iván's "Magyarország családai címerekkel" and studies from the Turul journal etc...provide well-documented evidence supporting the article's claims.

By dismissing the carefully referenced content as "original research," we ignore the substantial historical groundwork that differentiates these families. Removing the article goes against Wikipedia's mission to present reliable, well-researched knowledge, especially on complex historical topics. A. Kenessey Kenessey Aurél (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have taken the necessary steps to improve the article and align it with Wikipedia's standards. Specifically, I have removed all original sources from the article, even though many of these documents were relevant and provided interesting historical insights. This was done to ensure that the content adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines for verifiability and reliance on secondary sources.

By focusing solely on academic and secondary references, I hope the article now meets the standards expected for inclusion. I believe that this revision strengthens the article's credibility while retaining essential information about the Báthory families. Have a nice day! A. Kenessey Kenessey Aurél (talk) 06:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is an essay, not an encyclopedia article. Everyone knows in 2024 that we are an encyclopedia of notable topics, not a place to host your original research on genealogy. To claim ignorance is untenable. I’m not saying everyone knows about our arcane rules, but don’t play dumb here. We are not a place to prove or disprove anything - that’s the purpose of academic research! In addition, it is extensive and rambling, beyond the scope of its claims, and so poorly written that it would need to be started again to be considered an article. Bearian (talk) 09:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bearian,

I understand the concerns expressed regarding the article, and I wish to address them comprehensively. First and foremost, I have taken significant steps to remove any original research, including personal documents, from the article. The current version is solely based on verified secondary and tertiary sources, many of which are academically recognized and cited in scholarly literature. These sources clearly establish the distinction between the two separate Báthory families, a topic that is frequently misunderstood, even in Hungary! It is indeed crucial that we maintain the encyclopedic quality of Wikipedia, which is why I have made every effort to improve the article’s reliability and focus. The argument that the article "proves" something is perhaps based on an outdated version, which may have given that impression due to the inclusion of original documents. These have since been removed, and the emphasis now lies on presenting well-documented historical information from reliable sources. As for the accusation that the article is "extensive and rambling," it is important to note that the Báthory families’ history is indeed complex, and to fully address the two distinct lineages requires a degree of detail that helps avoid conflating them, which is already a widespread problem in many related sources. Simplifying this could easily lead to further misconceptions and inaccuracies. Finally, I would like to reiterate that Wikipedia serves as an encyclopedia that strives to provide accurate information about notable historical topics. The confusion between the Báthory families and the importance of their distinct identities certainly qualifies as such a topic. Deleting the article would contribute to a lack of understanding regarding these two lineages, and potentially perpetuate the misinformation that this article was attempting to clarify. My goal is not to "prove" anything through original research but to document verifiable history that has been overlooked or misunderstood.

Kind regards,

A. Kenessey Kenessey Aurél (talk) 10:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a note to Hijérovīt : I would like to mention that Tibor Báthory-Szőnyi has proven his direct descent from the Báthory of Gágy family to the Hungarian Government Office's Department of Internal Affairs and Civil Registration, which is why he was able to restore the Báthory name in a legal procedure in 2023. According to Hungarian laws, historical names can only be adopted if the applicant can authentically prove their descent through civil, church, and archival documents.^[1]^[2] The reason you couldn't find any sources about him online is that he was previously known as Tibor Szőnyi, among other roles, as the curator and director of the Budapest Opera Gallery ^[3]^[4]. I am a relative of him. Aurél Kennessey. Kenessey Aurél (talk) 09:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Move to Draft:Báthory family (of the Aba clan)~~. Although the subject of the article is notable, the content and style of the article do not meet the criteria. I think we should give the editor time to expand and modify the article, I see a willingness on his part to cooperate. --Norden1990 (talk) 10:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please look the article now. I believe this is a complete and professionally crafted article. Kenessey Aurél (talk) 11:41, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus yet. A source analysis for the references raised would be ideal.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The subject of the article itself is notable but the article, especially regarding the origin of the family, is full of factual errors and misinterpretations, as I presented in talk page. Despite I provided primary and secondary sources, The author of the article could not dispel my doubts. --Norden1990 (talk) 17:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denys Myrgorodskyi

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. UPE advert. Gas man No indication of significance. Refs are press-release, profiles, passing mentions, interviews and x of y articles scope_creep^Talk 09:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Law, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Millanguir

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

Fails WP BIO; depth ot the sources is not enough for proving the notability; Christianity Today has only a passing mention with highlighting the person's notability; Youtube is actually very bad source for citing. Nor more sources are provided. WP BEFORE was applied but I cannot add something reliable here. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:BISHOPS, "The bishops of major Christian denominations are notable by virtue of their status. This includes Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican Communion bishops." As a bishop in the Anglican Communion, Millanguir is covered by this longstanding precedent. (See also WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES, "The bishops of major denominations, including Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican Communion bishops, are typically found to be notable.") Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm seeing multiple hits in Church Mission Society which appears Anglican but sufficiently independent of this gentleman. This is an Op Ed in Spanish from June, but I'm unclear what the relationship is with Diario Austral; my guess based on the website appearances is that this is another daily Chilean paper. Basically, he's a relatively new bishop, coverage is anticipated to increase, this is in a non-English language with a history of systemic under-coverage with attendant difficulty in finding coverage that exists, and there's no guarantee that if we delete this now someone will come back and create it once he is unquestionably notable per GNG. Jclemens (talk) 15:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhagyashri Borse

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

Fails WP BIO; should be deleted due to insufficient reliable sources that establish her notability in the entertainment industry. The lack of significant coverage in independent media raises concerns about the article meeting Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and relevance. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NACTOR. She does not have any major role or contribution to the entertainment industry. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draftify: Fails WP:BIO and WP:NACTOR. Charliehdb (talk) 13:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: One film and a "special appearance" do not give us ACTOR. The second film might help, but sourcing is largely celebrity gossip articles. I don't find much of anything else. Oaktree b (talk) 14:57, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vivada Inland Waterways

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

Should be deleted because it lacks significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, which raises questions about its notability. Furthermore, the content appears promotional in nature, primarily serving as a company advertisement rather than providing an informative overview of inland waterways. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Maina

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

Fails WP BIO; depth ot the sources is not enough for proving the notability; general notability fails here; dependent or primary sources do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject. Only routine announcement are available. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. An obvious WP:GNG pass with WP:SIGCOV in the Nation (major Kenyan paper) and the Nelson Mail. Was a WP:BEFORE done? Furthermore, per WP:BISHOPS, "The bishops of major Christian denominations are notable by virtue of their status. This includes Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican Communion bishops." Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Kenya and New Zealand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uttar Gujarat Vij

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

Fails WP ORG; lack of notability, as it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Additionally, the content appears promotional and does not provide unique historical or cultural significance that warrants a standalone entry. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Jiaoriballisse (talk) 10:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Ingen

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

Fails WP BIO; depth of the only primary source is not enough for proving the notability Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 09:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:BISHOPS, "The bishops of major Christian denominations are notable by virtue of their status. This includes Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican Communion bishops." As a bishop in the Anglican Communion, Ingen is covered by this longstanding precedent, and he is also an acting primate of an Anglican Province. (See also WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES, "The bishops of major denominations, including Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican Communion bishops, are typically found to be notable.") Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas Öhman

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

Played once for IFK Gothenburg, then in semi-pro lower divisions. The problem when assessing whether he meets WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT is that the coverage of him fails WP:ROUTINE, being transfer announcements. I might be swayed by two or three sources with some more substance. Geschichte (talk) 08:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

probably Delete I had a look on the Swedish wikipedia, but they seem pretty much like routine sources. I don't see enough either for GNG. Unless someone can prove me wrong it's a delete from me. Govvy (talk) 11:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daichi Ishiyama

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

The claim to notability, playing 17 times in Singapore and then in Japanese amateur leagues, is weak. The sources are not enough to rectify that and as such he fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 08:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sleaford, Newark-on-Trent

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

There is no evidence that this ward is notable. There is no evidence that a "suburb" called Sleaford exists, and it is not included in List of United Kingdom locations: Si-Sm#Sl. There are several references which appear to be fascinating books about the history of Newark's elections, but which do not appear to mention Sleaford ward. All I can find is that it exists as a ward electing one councillor to Newark Town Council. As explained in the rather confusing "Geography" section, it is not a ward for elections to the next level of government, Newark and Sherwood District: see 2023 Newark and Sherwood District Council election. There seems to be no accessible map showing the boundary of this ward. (The geog coords given lead to Bede House Lane, postcode NG24 1PY, which Mapit.com puts as being in Beacon ward for district council elections, but unfortunately Mapit.com does not mention wards at town council level).

As far as I can see, all we can verifiably say about "Seaford, Newark" is that is a ward electing one councilor to Newark Town Council, being one of 7 wards. That is not enough for a Wikipedia article.

The article Newark-on-Trent#Governance mentions the town council, stating that it has 18 councillors elected from 4 wards, with a reference to an archived 2011 source showing 5 wards. I suggest that paragraph should be updated to reflect the current situation, where there are 7 wards, perhaps showing the number of councillors per ward (ranges from 1 to 5), and that Sleaford, Newark-on-Trent (and probably the other wards) should redirect there. PamD 07:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. PamD 07:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK WP:SOFIXIT: I've updated the information about Newark Town Council (which was a red link until a few minutes ago) in Newark-on-Trent#Governance. PamD 07:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: If this article survives, either as an article or a redirect, it needs to be added to Sleaford_(disambiguation). PamD 07:51, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: I now see that the map referenced at currently ref 5, when zoomed in, shows the boundary of the ward, which appears to be the southern corner of the Bridge district council ward. But I doubt that even this is enough for an article. PamD 08:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. jlwoodwa (talk) 08:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Titans/Young Justice: Graduation Day

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

Reverted redirect. There are scant sources found on Google News. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 06:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Cavanagh

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

Fails WP:GNG, most sources do not cover Cavanagh in-depth, rather 1 or 2 brief mentions. GMH Melbourne (talk) 05:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Entertainment, and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 05:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PimComedy Fashion Show

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

References are event listings and non-rs entries. Fails WP:SIGCOV. A before virtually nothing. scope_creep^Talk 12:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre and New York. Shellwood (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Poetry, Music, Entertainment, Events, and Fashion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:10, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shin Young-chol

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

The claim to notability, playing 2 games in Korea and possibly some in Thailand, is very weak. The sources are not enough to rectify that, and as such he fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 06:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: as per nom and article is unsourced. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 08:34, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and South Korea. Shellwood (talk) 09:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:23, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, not enough reliable source coverage exists to merit an article. MetropolitanIC (💬|📝) 04:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 05:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NLC Dolly Gunj Solar Power Plant

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV Thewikizoomer (talk) 16:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As the page creator, I attempted to improve it by including a GlobalData report in the Further Reading section. However, if the majority of votes on this Afd support deletion, my only request is to merge this page with Andaman_and_Nicobar_Islands#Infrastructure. Charlie (talk) 07:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:23, 7 October 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 keep‎. (non-admin closure) TarnishedPath^talk 04:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brad Farmer

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

There has been a lot of IP nonsense in the history of this article, so while I agree with the IP's PROD, I think this merits an AFD. Farmer has been cited, but since OA isn't sufficient I don't see WP:BIO level coverage Star Mississippi 21:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Australia. Star Mississippi 21:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Environment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Looking at the sources currently in the article there is borderline notability. Online I have also found quite a bit that can also contribute towards WP:GNG ([9][10][11][12]). I will add what I can to the article. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:56, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have semi'ed the article due to the blanking, but not this discussion. If someone feels I should not have done so as nom, feel free to amend. Star Mississippi 00:52, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Sources 3 and 4 in the comment above are good, in addition to the 3rd source in the article. Should be enough for GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 12:15, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is Brad Farmer AM. I do not understand why or by who the wiki page relating to me is suggested to be deleted. How can I fix this ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.145.11.26 (talk) 05:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 04:27, 7 October 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.

List of most-followed Kick channels

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

WP:NLIST requires the subjects being listed to be discussed as a group in any significant depth by reliable sources. Although some sources have discussed Kick's channels collectively, those are all about the controversies and publicity stunts those creators have caused, not about their number of followers [13] [14] [15]. The abundance of coverage of WP:SENSATIONAL events that were designed by online celebrities for the exact purpose of gathering media attention is rarely a good argument for notability, and I doubt that this topic needs a stand-alone list considering that Kick (service) is already an article (which meets WP:NCORP mostly because of the coverage of said controversies to begin with). Badbluebus (talk) 19:48, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Lists of people, Internet, and Lists. Badbluebus (talk) 19:48, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some sources here do focus on talking about the numbers of followers of specific big channels of this website (e.g. Amouranth, xQc and Adin Ross), but NLIST requires those creators to be discussed as a group, not individually. And needless to say, celebrity gossip websites and online databases are rarely reliable sources. Badbluebus (talk) 19:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: In addition to the nominator's reasons, this list is unmaintanable. The data in the table comes from a dynamic database that claims to "collect[] and aggregate[] streaming data from Kick.com using statistics and charts" (whatever that means). voorts (talk/contributions) 21:22, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This article is essentially the same as List of most-followed Instagram accounts, List of most-followed Twitch channels & List of most-followed TikTok accounts, so there is a precedent to allow these types of lists, this list serves a valuable purpose by documenting significant trends in an evident and impactful space. Claims that the list is “unmaintainable” due to dynamic follower numbers are not strong enough for deletion. Other Wikipedia pages regularly update stats like revenue, sales figures, or most-followed accounts, and the content remains relevant despite being dynamic. As a growing platform, Kick has generated significant media attention, and reliable sources regularly cover its top streamers. Listing the top 30 most-followed channels does not represent an indiscriminate collection of information; it focuses on the most popular accounts on one of the newest major streaming platforms, essential for cultural and media studies. The argument that Kick's controversies are the only notability factor ignores the clear public interest in tracking which creators hold the most followers. I agree that it needs better citations, but that will be fixed with time. I know that editors, including myself, will maintain and update this list as needed. A note about the last update date should address concerns about outdated information. Deleting this list would limit Wikipedia’s ability to document the evolution of social media platforms, especially those rising in relevance like Kick.JeanSegura (talk) 20:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, we do not make deletion decisions based on what other lists (or articles) exist or do not exist on Wikipedia. The reason for this is that we're looking at this list's notability, not the notability of those other lists; those lists might be notable, or they might not, but the focus of this discussion is just this list. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:48, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand and agree with you that each list’s notability should be considered individually. However, it's important to note that this list meets the same standards as similar lists, which is why it meets the inclusion criteria based on its own notability. You will find media online that covers kick followers, just as it does for other platforms. Reliable sources such as "NBC News" have show their follower counts and impact. I really think that the notability of this list is okay, as the list is not merely about individual creators but about Kick's social impact. JeanSegura (talk) 21:17, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid reason to keep an article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:29, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TarnishedPath^talk 04:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dinosaurs the Terrible Lizards

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

Non-notable film. Cited sources only talk about the extinction of dinosaurs without mentioning the film at all. Notability is clearly lacking and fails WP:NFILM. CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of films featuring dinosaurs. I find it mentioned here and there, but no significant coverage, and it was only 10 minutes long. Geschichte (talk) 09:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tribal Health Research Office

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

Nominated for deletion as this article does not have the potential to pass WP:GNG (because it is an unfixable issue, draftify is not the correct action, AfD is better option). A search returns no secondary independent sources of the subject, as all sources are from the NIH who operates the research office. Wibbit23 (talk) 03:51, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 03:57, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

REDIRECT to List of institutes and centers of the National Institutes of Health. It's not surprising that an agency like has lots of primary sources. Secondary passing mentions in Google Scholar indicate that it is involved in a lot of work (tracking COVID, cancers, etc., on tribal lands) that might well be mentioned in other articles, unfortunately it doesn't add up to reach the current GNG level. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinkhus Rovner

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

Cannot find any books, journal articles, newspaper articles, or websites mentioning him. Only websites that did mention him are Wikipedia mirror cites. Hell, this is possibly a hoax. Roasted (talk) 03:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Politics, and Ukraine. Roasted (talk) 03:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with points listed above. Multiple google searches (including with aliases) did not return any results. Sources in article do not support any of the article content (one does not exist, and one has very limited information). Wibbit23 (talk) 04:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derrick LeBlanc

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Derrick LeBlanc (2nd nomination)

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

Nominated for deletion as my search did not yield significant coverage per WP:GNG. Most available sources come from team websites for from fan sites or blogs which WP:SPORTCRIT states is not valid. My search yielded two results that would be considered reliable secondary sources, but as WP:3REFS states in most cases, three references would be needed to establish notability. Reliable source analysis from my search:

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/college/kentucky/2020/01/03/kentucky-football-dl-coach-derrick-leblanc-leaving-arkansas/2809501001/

This source is from 2020 and is focused on the University of Kentucky having to fill the role of defensive line coach due to Leblanc leaving.

https://sports.yahoo.com/cardinals-hiring-dolphins-assistant-dl-061650718.html

Brief history of LeBlanc's career after being hired by the Cardinals.

As mentioned, all other found sources are either fan sites or blog sites which are not usually considered reliable sources. Other sources also include Team sites, which are not considered independent. Wibbit23 (talk) 03:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Louisiana. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 03:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derrick LeBlanc is an NFL coach, most of whom have Wikipedia profiles, especially the one's who have coached as many years as he has. The NFL is a multi-billion dollar business and the most popular sports league in the world. Thanks! TurtleTurtle00 Turtleturtle00 (talk) 04:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While your points on the popularity of the NFL and coaches are valid, Wikipedia does have specific guidelines for inclusion into the namespace. One such criteria is WP:GNG which states that subjects of articles must have significant, non-trivial, independent, secondary coverage. As required by AfD, I preformed a google search on the subject, and returned sources that are not able to establish notability. Blogs, fan pages, and team/NFL pages are not able to establish notability. Wibbit23 (talk) 04:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - WP:3REFS is an essay, not a notability guideline, so in some cases 2 refs are enough. But this subject has more, for example here and here. Rlendog (talk) 14:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware that it is an essay and that two can be suitable (hence "most cases"), however, I included 3REFS as the two sources I found were not enough to establish notability due to the first one focusing on the team he was leaving four years ago and how they would fill the vacant slot and the second being a very brief overview of his career. I am not able to open your proposed sources, if you could send them in alternate format that would be great. Thanks! Wibbit23 (talk) 15:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You may need access to newspapers.com, which can be done through the Wikipedia Library. Rlendog (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of characters in Monarch of the Glen

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

Non-notable list of characters that is completely unreferenced. WP:SIGCOV could not be found. Jontesta (talk) 02:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Jontesta (talk) 02:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Was previously at AfD under the title of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minor characters in Monarch of the Glen so ineligible for soft deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Monarch of the Glen (TV_series)#Cast - The list is completely unsourced and only contains overly detailed plot summaries. The main article for the series already lists the main characters and major reoccurring characters, so this can just redirect there. The characters not already present at the main article appear to be extremely minor. Rorshacma (talk) 15:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Kelley (bassist)

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

This person fails WP:BANDMEMBER, article should be redirected to The Roots. For a longer rationale, see the reply I gave to the article creator after my initial redirection. Mach61 23:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Texas. Mach61 23:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A similar AfD happened recently for another member of The Roots and The Tonight Show Band, see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamal Gray. There, another editor, User:Tau Corvi made a keep argument, which also applies here. "Per WP:MUSIC a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles is notable. Gray is a member of The Roots and The Tonight Show Band, both have WP articles." Hexatekin (talk) 14:54, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, my argument was for a redirect, but in the end, the article was kept. Tau Corvi (talk) 17:06, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah sorry for that yes I see now your argument was for a redirect for the Kamal Gray article, but in the end it was kept. Hexatekin (talk) 19:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hexatekin "The Roots" and "The Tonight Show Band" are currently one-and-the-same, this argument is clearly against the spirit of WP:BAND#C6. Mach61 18:07, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright well I added another source and I will attempt to add more sources in the next few days, as I do believe he has been written about a bunch over the past 15ish years since joining The Roots. Hexatekin (talk) 19:42, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hexatekin

The sources you added consist of:

A non-independent interview with Premier Guitar
An OkayPlayer that, like the Inquierer article previously mentioned has little to say of Kelley himself
Another No Treble album announcement that has little to say about Kelley

Mach61 14:34, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since this fails WP:NPERSON and is not saved by either WP:NCREATIVE or by WP:MUSIC's pertinent paragraph. The sources tracked or already presented are worthless. Wikipedia is not a musicians directory nor a collection of random information. -The Gnome (talk) 20:06, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elijah Kahlenberg

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

BLP that reads like an organisation article. Lots of interview and profiles, passing mentions. Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 19:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Scope creep, I am the one who created the article. I have no financial relationship with the subject 66.112.246.20 (talk) 19:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am relatively new to wiki-editting, but happy to make any proper edits to avoid deletion. Just message me with some guided assistance and I will be happy to make changes. StepToMyLeft123 (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 20:00, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Judaism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename to Atidna (following AfD discussion). The article does read a bit WP:PROMO on the organization and could be trimmed, and coverage on Kahlenberg is in the context of coverage about Atidna. There's enough WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:GNG nonetheless. Longhornsg (talk) 02:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Longhornsg: How is the organisation notable. It was created in 2002 and there is virtually no coverage on it, outside a few interviews with Kahlenberg. scope_creep^Talk 11:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep It was created in 2022 actually and has over 30 interviews from different sources including from Al Jazeera, CNN, NPR, ABC News, Axios, etc listed. Quick search shows there are even more not even mentioned on the page. This meets notable standards. I say keep and rename, although the article is lengthy. It is probably better to split into two articles, one about Kahlenberg and one about Atidna. TheHalalanator (talk) 20:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant 2022. I would have to send the Atidna article to Afd. Its not notable as an organisation and would fail WP:NCORP. I see this is your first edit on Wikipedia. How did you managed to find this Afd I wonder. scope_creep^Talk 09:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as is. After washing away the promotional or vanity stuff (e.g. "He aspires to become a professor of international law and contribute to peace efforts in the Middle East and, eventually, he also hopes to enter politics"), the text stands quite comfortably alone on the strong support of multiple sources of notability. -The Gnome (talk) 20:30, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I did a random check of a dozen or so sources and they seem to be mostly interviews in some form or another. There might be a stronger case for an article on the organisation (Atidna), but I'm undecided at this stage.-KH-1 (talk) 10:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There might indeed be a stronger presence of the Atidna organization than of our subject in the media. I confess I did not dedicate much time to Atidna. What I found about our subject, before I posted up my recommendation to Keep, was enough: We have enough sources supporting independent notability for a stand-alone article. Examples: The portrait of the "young Jewish peace activist" in the Times of Israel; a Daily Texan report on Kahlenberg's activism and on his scholarship; interviews in two major news media, one in Arab-speaking Al Jazeera, evidence of the person's media reach, and another in the Greek-speaking New World (Neos Kosmos); and so on. We're safe. -The Gnome (talk) 14:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble Sleeping (film)

AfDs for this article:

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

Article about a film of unclear release status, not adequately sourced as the subject of sufficient reliable source coverage to exempt it from the primary notability criteria at WP:NFILM.
This has gone through multiple cycles of "is it released or not?" in the past decade; it was claimed as "upcoming" when the article was created in 2015, then was edited in 2017 to claim that it had been released in 2015, and then got edited again in 2020 to indicate that it was still unreleased -- meanwhile, IMDb claims it was released in 2018, which has proven entirely unverifiable, while this piece in Screen Anarchy claims it was "long-hibernating" when it was "finally released" in 2022, but even that piece is just a short blurb wrapping a YouTube promo clip, not substantive or GNG-building coverage about the film.
As always, however, films are not all "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to show passage of WP:GNG on coverage about them -- but three of the five footnotes here are unreliable junk that isn't helping to build GNG at all, the two acceptable sources (Dread Central and The Wrap) both have to be discounted if the film didn't come out in 2015 as they claimed it was supposed to, and that Screen Anarchy blurb is the only new thing that's been published in any GNG-worthy reliable source since 2015 at all, which means even the best sources here aren't good enough if they're all either short blurbs or inaccurate problems.
Especially given that there are such unresolved questions about when this was ever actually released in the first place, there's just nothing here of enough enduring significance to exempt it from having to have much, much better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Canada, and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Merge with Robert Adetuyi#Career: where it is simply mentioned, and merge content about genre (+simplified plot), cast, date, etc; and sources. Not opposed to~~ Keep, given the existing coverage (and the film seems to have been released; review.) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 06:53, 23 September 2024 (UTC) and in light of the reviews identified by Donaldd23, at least. (The 3 reviews show the film was released in 2022 and is therefore considered a 2022 film). Thanks-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:46, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, in addition to the review listed above my Mushy Yank, there are these reviews [16] and [17] . And the question of it being released or not is answered by the fact it is streaming on Tubi [18] DonaldD23 talk to me 13:56, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neither "Heyuguys" nor "This Is Film" are reliable sources of GNG-building film reviews at all — film reviews have to come from reputable and established publications to build a film's notability, not just any random WordPress blogger that you can find on the internet. And while AIPT is better, it isn't enough to vault a film over GNG all by itself if it's the only GNG-worthy review that can be found. And I didn't question that the film has been released, but we've got three conflicting claims about when it was released with no fully satisfactory resolution to the matter of whether it belongs in Category:2015 films, Category:2018 films or Category:2022 films — of which it must be in one of those three, with absolutely no leeway for any "then just don't categorize it for year of release at all" opt-outs, so we can't just handwave that away as a non-issue. "Has been released" is not an instant notability freebie at WP:NFILM in and of itself — even a film that has been released still has to pass GNG on proper reliable source coverage about it, and can't park its notability on blogs or primary sources just because it's available for streaming somewhere. Bearcat (talk) 17:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:05, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:06, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Start – Socialist Internationalist Organisation

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

General failure to demonstrate notability. Article purely sourced from its own website and then International (CWI) (WP:ABOUTSELF violation). Attempt to find reliable sources showed no notable coverage in terms of news coverage. Some results appear on Google Scholar but from those I was able to access in English there are few mentions and those appeared trivial and more to do with outside organisations such as SYRIZA.

Article has been appropriately maintenance tagged for several years now yet improvement has not appeared.

Given that the International they are now affiliated to is non-notable (International Standpoint) there looks to be no obvious redirect target, so proposing deletion. Rambling Rambler (talk) 22:32, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Greece. Rambling Rambler (talk) 22:32, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -I'm wondering if someone cam look for Greek-language reliable sources? The organization has been around for 50 years and was once part of the Coalition of the Radical Left (Syriza) so there may be something out there. Wellington Bay (talk) 22:39, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the Greek sources I have looked at, there is nothing worthwhile. Although the party is old, it has never been influential outside its own area, so there is not enough coverage. A mention by name here is enough, i think. So Delete. Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 18:03, 24 September 2024 (UTC) (sock strike. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – My community barbeque has been around for 75 years, and it was even sponsored by the city. However, there are no reliable sources covering it in-depth, so it doesn't deserve an article of its own. Yue🌙 18:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Parking In Motion

AfDs for this article:

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

This was kept at AFD many years ago, and it was probably the right call then. This is something I see in ancient maintenance categories - the project was very exciting in 2011 but never went anywhere, the app disappeared, and there was never any subsequent source published anywhere. The sources cited were all from the initial rollout and seem to be blogs, for the most part, but notable blogs. Still, they were and kind of industry-oriented ones that one might suspect were often just passing on press releases.

This is all fine and well when a startup becomes Uber or Reddit or something, there will be no shortage of better sources, but what if nothing notable ever happens after the initial marketing blitz? The coverage was limited and is incomplete, we can't really say anything about what happened with Parking in Motion after the initial hype window. It didn't succeed, but how? Why? The article will probably never be able to say. There's nothing to add to it, no other Wikipedia articles probably need to link to it. It's just... there, incomplete, forever?

But upon reviewing the sources, I dunno that it rises to the level of non-trivial, definitely not-advertising-related sources mentioned in WP:WEB. The LA Times reference looks impressive in the citation, but I tracked it down and it just says "Parking in Motion helps you find and reserve parking spaces. It shows rates and provides directions. Free for iPhone." in a roundup of a few dozen road trip-related apps. I don't think that's non-trivial coverage. But I invite you to review this and the other sources. --Here2rewrite (talk) 22:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Software, Transportation, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weakest keep: found sources [19] and [20], and the CNet one was also good. These sources establish sustained coverage over a year and just barely meets SIGCOV. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those were in September/November 2011 and the initial articles were April/May 2011, and the LA Times ones mentions it's an archive of an earlier blog post. They still read like press releases: "But now you can know exactly what the parking situation is like before you arrive: Parking in Motion". I know this is a weird AFD because there are respectable news websites with paragraphs about Parking in Motion, but reading what they wrote, it does not feel like non-trivial coverage. I did find a working link to the CNET article, it's the best coverage I've seen. At least it's not just rewording a press release. But it still limits the coverage to the rollout hype, which didn't go anywhere. Without better sources, the Wikipedia article is stuck in the hype phase forever. --Here2rewrite (talk) 13:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's at least four different months, which seems just borderline enough to establish Sustained to me.
mentions it's an archive of an earlier blog post
See WP:NewsBlog. The author's page says she is their reporter, and the references to blogging seems to be just the format.
The articles have clear bylines so I don't think they're press releases. Product news in general, especially for hyped products, nearly always reads promotional because the writers are hopeful to see where it goes. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: While there is some coverage, it's all essentially trivial in nature. Rollout hype with no lasting impact does not seem to pass GNG. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Defunct app that never really gained much critical attention beyond the initial buzz. No sustained coverage... Even when it launched, I still think it was a "weak keep" at best. Oaktree b (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle at Tel al-Hawa

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

WP:SYNTH: No source evidence that a series of engagements in the vicinity actually constitute a battle as such and the term is not a Wikipedia artifice. Tagged for notability last month but no evidence of any discussion. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 16:40, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Israel, and Palestine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure. There is this article in Countercurrents.org. These articles[21][22] also give a higher level overview of the topic. Might need to do more research.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 04:18, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There is very little in searches about a "Battle at Tel al-Hawa"; in theory we could create many other "battles" around this conflict. We should stick to the ones that are noted in quality military sources; many such contrived battles in the Ukraine-Russia conflict are being rationalised (we get historic cases re-imaged as "battles" like Battle of Nicosia Airport). Aszx5000 (talk) 08:23, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 16:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not seen sufficient proof that there was a distinct battle at Tel al-Hawa. Warfare for sure. The concern with this article is practical, not theoretical. I'm very open to legitimate SPINOFFs for battles. gidonb (talk) 06:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip: possibly with a very selective merge. This comes across as a SYNTH aggregation of several events during the war, some separated by half a year, grouped together solely by geography. "Battle at <x>" brings to mind a single, continuous military conflict at that spot, not a collection of skirmishes separated by months of nothing there. Owen× ☎ 11:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ok, so far we have a "we probably shouldn't have this" consensus - but does that mean we delete it or redirect it?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:58, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mitra Sen Ahir

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

Procedural nomination per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 29#Mitra Sen Ahir. C F A 💬 01:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I expected the deletion on RfD since the article was based on a non-notable individual who attracted only passing mentions from few sources dating the past centuries. Indeed, this is not the only time when WP:NOTBURO has been ignored. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Military, Haryana, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Argentina women's national under-18 softball team

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

Subject does not meet the WP:NORG or WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 00:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Softball, and Argentina. Let'srun (talk) 00:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Part of a bundled nomination (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Singapore women's junior national softball team) so it can not be Soft Deleted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All the sources are primary. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 10:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keron Williams

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

I can't find any serious WP:SIGCOV on this person. Several Google searches brought back very, very few meaningful sources. This seems to fail WP:GNG as a result. The article also kind of comes across as self-made, possibly violating WP:COIN. Anwegmann (talk) 01:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, Canada, Florida, Massachusetts, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable as eight-year CFL player and four-time All-Star. This wasn't evident in the article at the time of this nomination but I have since reverted the page back to the last clean version before the COI-editing took over. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 05:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voltes V: Legacy – The Cinematic Experience

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

The film is basically a recap of Voltes V: Legacy. there is an upcoming re-release with new Japanese dubbing and new "never before seen scenes" but there is a lack of information for a separate article. Would be better to have this as a redirect to the source material. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 01:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, Japan, and Philippines. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 01:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: reviews here https://www.philstar.com/movies/2023/04/20/2260360/voltes-v-legacy-review-finally-filipino-movie-could-rival-marvel-dc and https://www.pep.ph/news/local/172863/voltes-v-legacy-the-cinematic-experience-review-a717-20230422?s=fjda47timjo28plrksh5mk98a9 at least; and the rest of the coverage shows this is notable enough for a standalone page (not to mention notable cast, crew). So very opposed to deletion -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:55, 7 October 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 draftified‎. (non-admin closure) ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Driggu Florentino

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

Subject does not meet WP:GNG, WP:SINGER, or WP:ACTOR. All the references are either the subjects own website, or self-published sources that are promotional in nature. Also appears to have been deleted in the past with the discussion here. The page creator deleted the PROD tag so I am bringing it to AfD. cyberdog958^Talk 01:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Bands and musicians, Music, and Brazil. cyberdog958^Talk 01:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I strongly believe that the deletion of the biography is unnecessary, given that the article was created based on solid and reliable references.

The subject of the biography has sufficient relevance to be included in the encyclopedia, especially within the context of the underground synthpop movement in the Northeast, which reinforces the importance of its preservation.

The biography is well-founded, containing sources that support the facts and a structure that provides appropriate backing.

Deleting the article would result in the loss of valuable information about the subject and, consequently, about an important musical movement within the Brazilian underground scene. The article still has significant potential for expansion, deepening the understanding of the cultural and historical impact of the underground synthpop movement and the unique contribution of the subject.

Keeping this article is a way to preserve and disseminate knowledge about an important part of Brazilian music and culture from the north, which deserves recognition and documentation.

Therefore, removing the article would be a setback in documenting this movement, as the encyclopedia plays a crucial role in recording and preserving cultural diversity.

The biography not only contributes to understanding the underground movement but also highlights the subject's relevance within this musical scene. The Artist was recognized by the Museu da Pessoa as one of the most important people, both in activism and art, please do not remove this biography. https://museudapessoa.org/pessoa/rodrigo-barbosa-da-silva/ https://nonbinary.wiki/wiki/Driggu_Florentino Moniiquedecastro (talk) 05:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete little to no third party coverage.-KH-1 (talk) 09:53, 7 October 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.

Protector (DC Comics)

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

Fails WP:GNG the page itsself notes that he's a very minor character with a little over three appearances. Also appears to be some prose issues Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Extremely minor character with no more than a handful of actual appearances. The only non-primary source included in the article is a defunct fan-site. Searching for sources mostly turns up entries in fan-wikis, including some that are just mirrors of this article. The only bit of coverage that could be considered significant is this piece from ScreenRant, which even if one were to discount the concerns at WP:VALNET of using the site as the sole means of establishing notability, would not be enough on its own to pass the WP:GNG. Rorshacma (talk) 00:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect to List of DC Comics characters: P. BD2412 T 01:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. No reception/analysus, pure WP:FANCRUFT plot summary + catalogue list of appearances. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Per the former. Noorullah (talk) 15:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.teol.hu/helyi-kozelet/2018/12/vedettseget-elvezo-nevet-nem-vehet-fel-ma-barki-szabadon

[2] ttps://net.jogtar.hu/jogszabaly?docid=a1000001.tv

[3] ttp://news.bbc.co.uk/local/threecounties/hi/people_and_places/arts_and_culture/newsid_8376000/8376561.stm

[4] ttp://www.elisa-schaar-art.com/es/files/Katalog_Opera_Gallery_Elisa_Schaar.pdf

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]