Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

18 July 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

< July 17	July 19 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

ZipZoomfly

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

I initially WP:PRODed this with the following rationale "Non-notable, defunct retailer. None of the current sources are actual coverage of the company in reliable sources, merely being things such as database listing or user generated content like reviews. Searching for sources under both the "ZipZoomfly" and "Googlegear" names did not turn up any coverage in reliable sources." An IP user contacted me on my Talk page requesting to contest the PROD with this rationale: "ZipZoomFly.com aka GoogleGear.com was an important part of early internet history and a popular place to shop before newegg was founded. The lawsuit between them and google.com (alphabet) was a noteworthy case of parody vs trademark. The page is worth keeping because their are lessons to be learned from it's downfall." I don't agree that reasoning is sufficient to address the sourcing issues that keep this company from passing the WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, but since the PROD was contested, I am moving it to AFD for discussion instead. Rorshacma (talk) 20:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Internet. Rorshacma (talk) 20:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aangan Ke Laxmi

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

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. In fact there not even enough sourcing ( or content) to figure out what this is about. Appears to be a mashup of two different films with similar names. Aangan Ke Laxmi and Aangan Ki Laxmi Info box says 1986 film but the only two sources that actually discuss it are short "future film" type pieces from a couple years ago. Found nothing in a search for Aangan Ke Laxmi North8000 (talk) 18:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It appears there have been a few mixups here. It looks like Aangan Ke Laxmi (the article title) is a 1986 film (entirely non-notable); see this mention in a book bibliography. Sources 3 and 4 in the article are referring to a film called Aangan Ki Laxmi (sometimes Aangan Ki Lakshimi), which has more coverage and was released last year. Aangan Ki Laxmi probably meets NFILM/GNG (see [1][2][3] and on Google). It would be helpful here if the creator (NIA3000) clarifies what exactly this article is about or if the two films are related. If it is about the 1986 film, then I vote delete. Otherwise, I am not familiar enough with the topic to decide what to do here. C F A 💬 19:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if the second film is notable, would Draftifying this help? Get it sorted out and publish back in mainspace with proper sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 22:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would be fine with me. But there's a lot to sort out, starting with the title. And there's not much to save. North8000 (talk) 13:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think we need to hear from more editors as we have opinions to Draftify and Delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prashanth Venkataramanujam

AfDs for this article:

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

Non-notable BLP. Sources relate either to Patriot Act or Hasan Minhaj. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj, you mean? And he might mean WP:CREATIVE as creator/writer of this series... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Television. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2014 Schalke 04 Cup

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

As a friendly tournament, the matches were of no consequence. Thus, 10 years later, we can clearly see that the tournament was not noteworthy, wasn't important in the world of football and got a corresponding lack of coverage (apart from reports of the matches). The level of detailed coverage on display (goalscorers, match kick-off times, table) is therefore not needed, with the entry failing WP:NOTINHERITED (notability not being inherited from the participating teams), WP:MILL, WP:SUSTAINED and WP:NOTSTATS among others. Geschichte (talk) 20:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – It is self-evident that a friendly tournament will not change the course of football history, but the record of a competition that brought together four top-tier clubs in Europe does not seem impertinent to me, and the records of the matches and other relevant information are all available for verification. As there were no more editions to stabilize the competition, as occurred with the Audi Cup, I understand the nomination, but I do not see sufficient reason to eliminate the article. Svartner (talk) 08:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence of WP:SUSTAINED coverage Brief bursts of news coverage may not sufficiently demonstrate notability, and thus doesn't meet WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 15:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 15:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and part merge to 2014–15 FC Schalke 04 season, there is a bizarre notion that pre-seasons have no bering on club seasons, well they can, from injuries to key players, a club debut for another player. I don't see a need for this AfD at this level. There is a scattering effect of information and then there is no information. How in-depth to you want an article to be. It could easily be kept with good coverage. But I don't see the point here. Clearly no thought to a redirect or adding certain information to the other club season articles. Govvy (talk) 20:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinion is divided here. Looking for more participation to determine consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nox (platform)

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

Speedy was just declined (courtesy @Jeraxmoira and Let'srun:, so we're here. It's a copy paste from the source which was present in the first version so there's nothing to revert to and no indication the text was released under an applicable license. I'm unable to find sufficient sourcing on which to build even a stub following rev del. Star Mississippi 19:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 19:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There seems to be a lot of reliable sources on this subject when searched for "Nox" platform SDN on google books, scholar and I believe the platform was/is used widely. If someone can ping a subject matter expert, it would be useful to evaluate the sources. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more editors want to weigh in here?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Al Bu Sa'ad

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

This article fails WP:GNG and is entirely made up of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. None of the sources mention "Al Bu Sa'ad". Additionally, there is a "Culture and cuisine" section which seems to have no relation to the topic of the article. Skitash (talk) 16:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Culture section refers to the culture and cuisine of the Al Bu Sa’ad tribe. Additionally, the sources refer to the Isaaq tribe which is a parent tribe of the Al Bu Sa’ad, or mention the Somali variation spelling of Al Bu Sa’ad as Sacad (bin) Musa. Please help out the article by adding citations rather than nominate the whole article for deletion.

Thanks,

Ismail. Ismail7Hussein (talk) 17:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Somalia. Shellwood (talk) 17:58, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more opinions on this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Genie (programming language)

AfDs for this article:

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

Article was deleted via AfD in 2009 but then recreated. Survived an AfD in 2019 which was quickly closed as a revenge nomination, without discussion. Sources do not provide sufficient coverage and/or are not reliable. Just another non-notable programming language (dialect). IntGrah (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. IntGrah (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I found some sources that describe unrelated programming projects/proposals that contain the word "Genie", but nothing beyond that. This subject is not notable. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American propaganda in the Mexican–American War

AfDs for this article:

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

This is a trainwreck of an article. It has been appropriately tagged as being written like an essay, lacking notability, and possible original research. This simply is not an encyclopedia article at all, and the references are pretty threadbare. It was nominated for deletion twelve years ago, but comments about biting the newbies and allowing it time to be developed led to a "no consensus" result. Well, it's been twelve years and the article still has all of the same problems, so I don't think waiting is the correct strategy at this point. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Mexico, and United States of America. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tariq Chauhan

AfDs for this article:

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

In its current form, this biography of a living person makes no reference to anything that is said by third parties about the subject, and so does not satisfy general notability. The one reference is a press release which makes a passing mention of the subject, which is not independent coverage or secondary coverage. It states that the subject is the co-founder of EFS Facilities Services Group, but an article on that group has been deleted for lack of corporate notability, so there is no good redirect target. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Companies, and India. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Written by a just-barely-autoconfirmed sleeper as copyright infringement from a press release. After that was stubbified, revdelled, and draftified and nobody was looking anymore, he pasted the same material back in, where it lasted until the past few hours. Should be speediable, and the only reason it isn't is because we let the good-hand socks of paid editors vote against reasonable countermeasures against advertising even as obvious as this. And, btw, EFS Facilities Group wasn't just deleted, it's currently heading very rapidly towards a blacklisting at DRV. —Cryptic 19:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archaeological Seminars Institute

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

Tour agency that fails WP:NCORP. Extensive history of WP:COI and WP:PROMO issues. – Joe (talk) 18:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Travel and tourism, Archaeology, Israel, and Palestine. – Joe (talk) 18:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1M1B

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

Appears like one of the many organizations recognized by UN. However I find the article to be having notability issues. Inviting your comments. Thewikizoomer (talk) 18:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India. Shellwood (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Age and health concerns of Joe Biden

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

Unnecessary content fork, inappropriate WP:SPINOFF, hyper-fixating on the news-of-the-hour. There's nothing here that cannot be covered by a short mention at Joe Biden, and a bit more at Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign. Note that there was once at attempt at a similar article for Mr. Trump, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump. Zaathras (talk) 12:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Zaathras (talk) 12:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator's rationale, as well as WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOPAGE. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 12:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Changing !vote to Keep after finding the numerous subsequent arguments persuasive. ~~This is clearly heading into WP:SNOW territory.~~ A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 00:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep as the article stands it would warrant deletion, but I think the issue is article worthy in the wake of his debate performance. This is the most embattled a (presumptive) nominee has been since the Donald Trump Access Hollywood tape incident in 2016, which has its own article not to mention that Biden has been dogged with questions about his cognition since even before he ran in 2020 and up until recently was dismissed as bad faith attacks by his opponents. In the last week, that is no longer the case.
If the article can be fleshed out, it should be kept. PaulRKil (talk) 13:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 13:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Is this article going to have any staying power? If anything else develops on the subject, perhaps more can be added. I support Draftify at this point until/if more can be cohesively developed on this subject. BarntToust (talk) 13:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think life (events) will quickly develop this article. Unless Biden resigns, the days and months will roll on and every health incident will be scrutinized. When he resigns, health problems will be the reason for his resignation – an important event and also a detailed analysis. There is no need to rush into deleting the article. Then we will need to restore. Wikipek (talk) 14:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and consequently restore Health of Donald Trump, which was merged/redirected pursuant to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump. Both articles covered much the same kinds of concern. BD2412 T 15:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I agree with this. Trump and Biden's health and age have both been extremely scrutinized over the years. MarkiPoli (talk) 17:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The creation was a bit hasty and puts us in news territory, which is not great, but if GnocchiFan keeps adding 1-2kB a day it will be hard to justify deletion(they're the one who created it). The Trump matter needs its own discussion, it's an old one and tit-for-tat is a bad look. Trump doesn't have the media jumping on him for this, and he didn't stand gerbil-eyed with his mouth agape at the recent debate. [4] SmolBrane (talk) 16:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SmolBrane: The significance of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump is not with respect to the tit-for-tat issue, but with respect to the specific points of discussion raised there that are applicable to this discussion, specifically the assertion made in that discussion that we should not have any freestanding articles on the health of current public figures, and that Wikipedia should follow the Goldwater Rule prohibiting medical professionals from commenting on the health of public figures who they have not personally examined. A great many participants in that discussion supported imposing such a rule, which would obviously vitiate inclusion of comparable medical opinions about Biden absent personal examination. I opposed the imposition of that rule in the Trump discussion, and would oppose it here equally. We are in an historic moment of having two octogenarian presidential candidates, and the Trump article, at the time of its deletion, had dozens of high-level sources commenting on issues with regard to Trump's health, so it is a fair bellwether for the admissibility of the Biden article. BD2412 T 18:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am simply uncomfortable turning this AfD into a discussion about that other guy's AfD. WP:WAX applies and I'm not convinced the situation with Biden is adequately symmetrical for Health of Donald Trump !votes here. Once this discussion closes we could have a similar one regarding Trump imo. Note that Biden wasn't mentioned once on the Trump AfD. Regards SmolBrane (talk) 19:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SmolBrane: The shared underlying questions remain open, however. 1) Should Wikipedia have articles on the "health" of living public figures at all? 2) Should Wikipedia be bound by the Goldwater Rule, which prohibits reporting opinions on the heath of individuals by persons who have not conducted an examination of those individuals? BD2412 T 02:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The irony being--the Goldwater Rule article on this wiki allocates its largest section to a particular former American president(and no one else), observed by someone on the talk page as essentially a coat rack. The goldwater discussion should occur elsewhere if it's going to be a policy. This is headed for a speedy close. SmolBrane (talk) 00:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With how his health and age might end his time in office, I think you have to keep it. Vinnylospo (talk) 00:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with the insistence that it be improved to the point of being brought in line with the encyclopedic nature and aims of Wikipedia. I was a proponent of the creation of this article, but it really was launched too quickly and improperly. As I said on the talk page for Mr Biden's campaign, it's good if it enables us to analyze his health and its implications quickly and in real time, in a way that wasn't possible in the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the highly consequential nature of his health, but it can't be treated as a joking matter. At the very least, better must be done for a leading image than to employ a picture of Mr. Biden standing before his lit eighty-first-birthday cake. 216.255.100.62 (talk) 17:32, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's representative of a strategy from the administration and campaign - treat the age issue with humor. We aren't saying it's funny or not funny, it's just emblematic of part of their strategy and consequently part of the page. Maybe not first image, though. MarkiPoli (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article is part of a research project, not a marketing campaign.

So long as it's here... Tyrekecorrea (talk) 21:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will move this image further down to the part of the article which refers to the White House response (I think the joke birthday is relevant there). Feel free to choose another image for the lead and add some further detail if you see fit. GnocchiFan (talk) 19:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm rubbish at image procurement and insertion. Anyway, wouldn't the thing to do for an article like this normally be to use a picture of him that would normally be used otherwise, his official portrait or a picture of him stumping, or something of the like? Tyrekecorrea (talk) 21:12, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOTNEWS, or Merge, as was done with AFD Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump (ended up a merge). If we do less than that here, it looks like we're playing politics in favor of the other candidate. — Maile (talk) 18:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, it really looks like we're are playing politics in favor of other candidate. However, after making the article more neutral (adding opinions about the lack of health obstacles, of which there are many) and perhaps changing the title ("Age and health of Joe Biden"?, "Health of Joe Biden"?), the article can be kept. The topic is very widely discussed, attracts attention and causes consequences at the center of the election campaign, unlike in the case of Donald Trump. Wikipek (talk) 19:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to change to Age and health of Joe Biden when this AfD is over. GnocchiFan (talk) 19:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is that the course of the conversation concerning the health of Mr. Biden is such that discussion on his age is going to be part of and in tandem with discussion about his health, since the end she has already attained has implications for his current health, and maintaining it is key to furthering his age. Since the two subjects have been introduced as a duality, the thing to do is to build both aspects up, so that each can facilitate the furtherance of the other. Tyrekecorrea (talk) 21:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and restore Health of Donald Trump - Both have received significant coverage in reliable sources and are likely to do so well before and after the current debate news cycle. ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 18:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with above Keep both. Fodient (talk) 20:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign, List of Democrats who oppose the Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign and 2024 United States presidential debates#Reception and aftermath. Each of the articles are rather weak to stand on its own merits (with the 1st and 2nd article falling under WP:REDUNDANT), but, given that the health concerns described in this article have come to a head in the current political controversy, these 3 articles could together provide cogent context and information regarding the current state of Biden's campaign as described in WP:MERGEREASON. Meanwhile, the section on the June debate on the 2024 article is large enough, at ~3500 words, to be arguably eligible for WP:SPINOFF, especially when accounting for coverage of previous presidential debates (e.g. 2020 United States presidential debates#October 22 presidential debate (Belmont University) at ~1,500 words). Much of this undue weight is due to the sheer length of the "Reception and aftermath" section (~2000 words), which this article would merge neatly with and provide appropriate context for. Baldemoto (talk) 21:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those subjects don't have a whole lot to do with one another. How can they stand as a solid unit together, and how would it not eventually makes sense to split them as the topics are grow too big to fit into one article going forward? Tyrekecorrea (talk) 21:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Without the media coverage and analysis that has transpired over the past 2 weeks, this topic would not be notable enough to warrant an article under WP:GNG. The reason why this article would be considered notable is because of the June presidential debate, and the flood of consistent news coverage, discussions, and analysis that transpired after the fact. This is plainly evident in the fact that 12 of the 34 citations in this article were written in the past 2 weeks alone. This article is also relied upon to provide the background for Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign. Therefore, it makes sense that these articles should be merged, with this article serving the purpose of providing appropriate context. If the article becomes too unwieldy, it would likely be due to the constant stream of new calls for Biden to step aside, which could remain separate in an article reminiscent of List of Democrats who oppose the Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign. Baldemoto (talk) 21:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article will continue to be improved with the increasing amount public interest in his high-profile gaffes both domestically and abroad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZR1748 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there is more than sufficient independent sources and coverage now for this. It is impossible to miss, but the original section should still be retained, at least in large part, on the Public image of Joe Biden page. That should not be entirely removed from that page for this page's creation. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added an excerpt from this article on the public image of Joe Biden page, which I think is appropriate if this article stays. GnocchiFan (talk) 11:51, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- this is a big deal--involving not just Biden but many Democratic leaders, and Republicans too, as well as a lo of reporters and physicians. I think it will permanently change how Americans evaluate older politicians. Rjensen (talk) 03:36, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a significant matter and has been covered in the media extensively. TheInevitables (talk) 03:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not only has concerns regarding Biden's health been around for a good while now through reliable coverage but this matter has only increased now that many Democrat leaders have called for him to drop out of this year's US election following the June debate with his health being the common denominator and rationale. I propose bringing back the Health of Donald Trump article for the same reasons that I have already described. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 05:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't think the article about Donald Trump's health should have been deleted either. In this case the coverage is even more universal, and until the election will probably get too extensive to just merge it into the main article without bloating that one. Nordostsüdwest (talk) 16:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a distinct and separate topic, and should not be deleted or merged with the article on his calls to drop out. Both should be kept as articles, as the latter is a recent phenomenon, while his age and health has been an issue/discussion for multiple years. (Ageofultron 17:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - seems to mirror the same discussion happening on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Calls_for_Joe_Biden_to_suspend_his_2024_United_States_presidential_campaign

Whoever closes that should close this Bluethricecreamman (talk) 18:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As just an occasional contributor to English-language Wikipedia (active mainly in German-language WP and on Commons), I will formally abstain here (as I'm not familiar enough with en-WP's practices), but my impression is that this article as well as Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign are rather short (when compared to the Joe Biden main article), not many language versions of Wikipedia have decided to split these topics into separate articles (in this case, only French and Finnish Wikipedia, and in the case of the other article, only Icelandic), and it would make more sense IMHO to incorporate them into the main article and Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign. Gestumblindi (talk) 20:36, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's the correct place for this information as well. I think I remembered hearing that Ronald Reagan had age and health concerns at the end of his presidency, but I can't see that article being kept if it were created now. SportingFlyer T·C 09:40, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This topic was already a subject of discussion in the media before the June 2024 debate, but this topic & the closely related topic Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign have been sucking all the air out of the room ever since then. At least in America's news media, concerns over Biden's age (and by extension his political future) even managed to palpably overshadow the news about the stunning election results in the UK and France. It's hard to argue this is a non notable subject. I'm surprised this is even at AfD. Vanilla Wizard 💙 01:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is just an essay. There's no reason why this shouldn't be included somewhere on the site, and some of it can be merged, but I think we're confusing news and political commentary with encyclopedic content, and I think this fails the 10 year test. SportingFlyer T·C 09:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign. The topic of his declining health and overall viability doesn't need multiple articles. Swinub (talk) 11:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back to Public image of Joe Biden. Absolutely no need for a separate article here. Can also be merged to the Calls For page. Again, we do NOT need this many separate pages covering closely related topics. Reywas92^Talk 14:32, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator’s and BD2412’s rationales, and Reywas92’s recommendation. Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 17:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and merge with preexisting pages on the topic, most notably on the Joe Biden and Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign pages, or any of the other pages mentioned by previous commenters. BootsED (talk) 03:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete obvious politically motivated content fork. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think this article wouldn’t be super noteworthy had it not been for the June debate performance. The president had experienced widespread questioning from those on both sides of the aisle as to whether or not he is fit to continue holding office. NathanBru (talk
Delete - severe violation of WP:RECENTISM and WP:NEUTRALITY to dedicate an entire page to a right-wing political talking point and treat it as fact. There's no page about age and health concerns of Ronald Reagan, who was reported to be senile in office and actually had Alzheimer's. Jaydenwithay (talk) 03:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jaydenwithay: We do, however, have articles on the Health of Abraham Lincoln, Health of Pope John Paul II, Health of Adolf Hitler, and so on, so these certainly can stand the test of time. We could have an article on the health of Ronald Reagan. It just needs to be written. BD2412 T 18:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Merge Where Necessary There's really no context to this article. It's definitely an important note in the conversation of Biden's current term and campaign, but in a vacuum it doesn't make any sense other than as an extension to those other articles. What happens to this page when he eventually dies? Doesn't pass the time test here. ⠀^tomástomás_tomás⠀talk⠀ 04:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this topic meets GNG. Biden's health and age concerns is squaring up to be a major issue in the 2024 election and thus has been subjected to significant attention in reliable sources, especially post-debate. There's no article where this can be comprehensibly covered without creating undue weight. Therefore, this fork is appropriate. R. G. Checkers^talk 05:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless a similar article is made called Concerns that Donald Trump is a narcissistic moron. The fact is, this is an unnecessary content fork, we could create endless fork articles about the pros and cons of the major party candidates that get press coverage, as well Concern that a worm really ate RFK, Jr.'s brain.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 17:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Milowent: Not to belabor the point, but the last version of the Health of Donald Trump article that is proposed to be restored in tandem with this article being kept had some discussion of armchair evaluations of Trump having narcissistic personality disorder, as well as commentary on Trump's own estimations of his genius. I think this would qualify for your "similar article" proposition, but for the title. BD2412 T 17:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that context, BD2412, i don't think "Health of Donald Trump" is anywhere remotely similar, but i need an article titled Does J.D. Vance Know Trump Almost Had His Last Vice President Killed? to feel this should stay. I fully admit to having a very biased view of Trump, which is also 100% correct.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 18:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not everything needs an article Cwater1 (talk) 23:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that, indeed False or misleading statements by Donald Trump is already an incredibly long article and some people are saying it will become our longest article ever. We will see.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 17:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep, this article has received steady coverage for quite some time now. Concerns over Biden's health have been raised since the start of his 2020 campaign, it's hardly "news-of-the-hour". Additionally, Wikipedia is built off consensus, not precedent. The deletion of a similar article on Trump is irrelevant.

Slamforeman (talk) 01:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is so much independent coverage of this that it clearly passes WP:GNG as a standalone topic. I am not concerned that this falls into WP:NOTNEWS as this has been an ongoing concern since the previous election, and as BD2412 pointed out, there are articles on the health of other leaders whose time has long passed. The last concern is whether this ends up being a WP:POVFORK, but I don't see why careful editing cannot end up in a balanced take on the subject, and merging with another article does not really change this. Overall, I do not think there is a strong policy rationale to delete the article. Malinaccier (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MERGE into Public image of Joe Biden. CNC33 (. . .talk) 19:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — At best, an unnecessary article. At worst, a BLP violation. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Purely factual information such as Biden catching Covid and coverage of his performance at the debate can, and should, be included in his page backed up with impartial citations. These matters do not need a separate article and nor does there need to be one about Trump's health. Wikipedia is in danger of becoming so American-centric and partisan that it will lose further credibility with the wider world. There are plenty of forums on the internet to compile opinions on Biden, Trump and whoever else. This is supposed to be an encyclopaedia for the world not an online battlefield for American politics. Shrug02 (talk) 20:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Goodwill tour

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

Reads more like a stand alone list than an article, and I don't think it meets notability for stand-alone lists. Many of the individual tours might be notable, but I don't think there's discussion of goodwill tours as a group, or at least I can't find any. If anyone can, though, then that would be great. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 17:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Travel and tourism. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 17:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of battles involving Sweden

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

Very cluttered, and serves no real purpose, there is a category for battles involving Sweden for a reason. Gvssy (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Gvssy (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This AfD nominated the talk page, not the article. This has a number of consequences, links not working and so on. Given the amount of scripts and automation around AfDs, is it easier to just close this and open a new one? Ping Gvssy. /Julle (talk) 16:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes of course, it was my mistake, I thought I was nominating the article. Gvssy (talk) 17:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of battles by geographic location #Sweden - I disagree with the OP's reasoning, as the page is useful and could be expanded to include useful information, similar to pages like List of battles involving Georgia (country). However, there isn't much to gain by having an entirely separate page devoted to it, as there aren't enough battles to do so, so a redirect is preferable. ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 18:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have corrected this nomination to reflect that the article was intended nominated, not the talk page. Normally I would not do this, preferring to procedurally close this and equally-procedurally formally nominate the article, but before I or anyone else could do that Politicdude legitimately presented their opinion regarding an alternative to deletion so there is no reason to fracture this discussion (and the article does have an AfD tag waiting, anyway). Apologies if any of this is out-of-process in any way. (No opinion or further comment at this time.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 17:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bosphorus Development

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

Promotional article for a company that fails WP:NCORP. All sources are WP:ORGTRIV (routine coverage of market entries, financing, awards, etc.), WP:PRIMARYSOURCES (interviews, self-published materials), or otherwise unreliable sources. WP:BEFORE search turned up nothing validating notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 15:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 18:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as the minimal sources for establishing notablity are present and company is operating in two countries and is behind the biggest buildings in Turkey (Istanbul Tower 205, Istanbul aquarium) etc.--RodrigoIPacce (talk) 10:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously we don't agree about the availability of WP:SIGCOV in WP:SIRS -- can you share your WP:THREE best sources for other editors to evaluate? (Notability is not WP:INHERITED from buildings this company may have been involved with.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:45, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep lean towards keep per WP NEXIST (Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article). The company had various names throughout its history, and it was mentioned in Turkish newspapers with no digital copies. I will try to add what I can find. 78.177.93.54 (talk) 08:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC) — 78.177.93.54 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 17:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khan Sir

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

This stub about an Internet personality whose channel is education based was recently accepted at AFC. I believe it to be a borderline acceptance, which is fine of itself. AFC reviewers role is to accept drafts which they believe have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. As a fellow AFC reviewer I believe that the subject is not verified to pass WP:BIO, and that the draft was below the acceptance threshold. On that basis I would not have accepted it. The referencing is independent, yes, but the content of the references is gossip column-like trivia, which simulates significant coverage, but which is not. I see the only way of resolving this is for the community to discuss it, hence AfD 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Education, Internet, and India. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am not going to vote here since my stance is clear, as I accepted the draft. At the time I saw the draft, it was not passing GNG, but I know the personality well and thought he might already have a Wikipedia article. When I found out he did not, I started to find significant coverages and added many that are currently cited. I respect Timtrent’s judgment, and we already discussed it on my talk page. We would like to get the community's views on the article. Lastly, I want to add that if the article can’t be kept, we can draftify it, as it has good sourcing, and the subject may gain more coverage to establish notability in the future. Happy editing. GrabUp - Talk 13:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Draftification is a perfectly acceptable outcome to me as nominator. I ought to have said that in the nomination. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep per WP:DONOTDEMOLISH - Subject has a reasonable claim to notability, and I don't see what draftifying would accomplish. ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 18:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have done some research to find Hindi sources and interestingly found many that may establish notability.
*BBC Hindi | *News18 Hindi | *NewsNation | *AmarUjala | *News18 Hindi and *Dainik Jagran Hindi
In my opinion, the BBC Hindi one is a very powerful source with significant coverage. I will leave it to the community. Thanks. GrabUp - Talk 08:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think its the time for voting Keep. GrabUp - Talk 08:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 17:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kinstellar

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

This law firm's page was created a decade ago, with no significant changes. The links used to cite it are now dead (aside from their own website), and none of them seem reliable to begin with. The only information on the article seems to be the company's formation and expansion. I tried searching for some more sources and came up empty. Niashervin (talk) 17:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Niashervin (talk) 17:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Central Asia, and Europe. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Garnheath distillery

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

Don't meet notability criteria and not enough citations to reliable sources. Frederik daomos (talk) 16:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

European empire

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

Not a valid disambiguation page - Altenmann >talk 16:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Completely artificial. Athel cb (talk) 16:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no evidence of use of term. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ballechin distillery

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

Don't meet notability criteria and not enough citations to reliable sources Frederik daomos (talk) 16:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 16:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
del insufficient coverage, even no claims of importance that can encourage search for sources. - Altenmann >talk 16:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom Achievers Award

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

Disputed PROD. My PROD rationale still stands, notability isn't automatic or inherited. There are so many awards out there that are being awarded to entities but an award's significance isn't solely determined by the prestige of the awarding entity or the notable recipients. Instead, verifiable evidence from reliable sources is required to substantiate claims of notability. These sources must specifically focus on the award itself, providing in-depth information. Sources primarily highlighting award recipients rather than the award itself don't establish notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Awards, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedly Keep: Article meets wikipedia:Notability, Also meets GNG, all the source are reliable, independent sources and it’s not inherited Notability, i suggest the nominator searches the topic and read through the article, as it’s a Gospel niche award and has multiple references from reliable source, the nominator has always been on my watch and nominates all my article for deletion and i think it’s likely a bad faith nomination but I’ll love to hear from other editors, thanks Madeforall1 (talk) 16:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Madeforall1 speedy keep only applies in certain situations listed at WP:SKCRIT, none of which apply. If there are additional sources with WP:SIGCOV please consider expanding the article with them to facilitate analysis by other editors, it is not a requirement but definitely helps, thanks. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:199B:E3C0:2FAB:D007 (talk) 18:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I find the idea that sources need to "specifically focus on the award" as overly strict; if major independent outlets are choosing to cover the announcement of nominees and winners, that conveys a degree of significance to those awards. In other words, there may not be significant coverage of the awards as an organization, but there is significant coverage of them as an event. Having worked a fair amount with TV and film award articles, I think this is in line with other examples (as an example, see Los Angeles Film Critics Association, which is basically just about the awards presented by the organization – the sources cover the ceremonies/nominees/winners, not the organization). RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add the caveat that I don't know enough about Nigerian media to say if the sources here are generally reliable, but since that wasn't the issue raised in the nomination, I'm assuming they are. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:08, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see how covering the award itself is a strict measure. How then do we measure the significance of a subject? There are so many awards out there that are being awarded to recipients at events, that aren’t notable awards, even campus/college/university awards are also being awarded at ceremonies, I don’t see how that generally counts towards establishing GNG. These coupled with the fact that most of these pieces from the sources used are just overly promotional and unreliable, WP:GNG isn’t anywhere closely established. Also, using Los Angeles Film Critics Association is a poor comparison, you can’t exactly say an award that has been awarded for over 30 years won’t satisfy GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces, You have dropped your comments before sir why dropping more and attacking someone that dropped his votes and options? As said notable independent news sites have covered more about the event over time and I think in creating articles, it’s shows how notable the award is and it’s not just school or private organization award but an award for gospel artist, as sources is not notable based on the number of references. Madeforall1 (talk) 15:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Madeforall1 Your comment above is nonsensical because it adds no value to this discussion. You’re literally badgering already and I’ve been playing along with you from your talk page to mine. My comments above were presented in line with this discussion, yours wasn’t and isn’t exactly useful to the discussion. Please stop this poor attitude of yours. Do not ping me if you have nothing useful to add to this discussion, I don’t want to be notified of your poorly presented comments. You’re already giving the vibe of both UPE and COI, and that’s probably the reason you’re upset because an article you created got AfDed. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces Is this how you insult people? You don’t deserve to be a reviewer, you are just attacking everyone, you do everything with bad faith, I don’t think you deserve the privileges you got here, you are even a new editor and yet you talk to people carelessly, desist from such act and listen to people, I wonder if you know everything. Madeforall1 (talk) 15:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Madeforall1: Do you have any sort of relationship with the subject of this article? I agree with Vanderwaalforces, your editing pattern is often indicative of undisclosed paid editing or a more general conflict of interest. If you do have a conflict of interest, whether you're being directly compensated for your edits or not, you have to disclose it. Not doing so could result in you being blocked from editing. Also, comments like yours above could be taken as personal attacks, so I suggest you strike them out. Please reply to this message confirming whether or not you have a COI with Kingdom Achievers Award. C F A 💬 04:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CFA, I don’t have any conflict of interests nor connected to the subject, but it’s also not nice for a particular user not to improve and article instead of constantly give bad faith reviews, else I don’t know the subject but I know the award and I’ve seen many gospel artists that have received awards which the references are also added to there articles on Wikipedia so I choose to write about the award. Madeforall1 (talk) 04:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CFA I will advise you don’t be in support of bad government. I have gone through this discussion and the person who is wrong here is the AFD nominator. He started the personal attack. The article creator was just all about why the nominator is after his life and all I can see here was the Nominator using offensive language on him or her and you expect such a person not to feel bad. Like C’mon. One thing I will not tolerate here on Wikipedia is making other editors feel bad when they have no intention to harm the platform even if they don’t know why they are here. And I don’t care what you have to say if the truth can’t be told. Sometimes this kind of habit makes those who create articles feel like they have got something like a COI to do with the subject which they might be innocent. They are ways of catching people with COI and not by insulting them and they trying to defend themselves makes them now a COI. I am very far away from supporting bad government. Who knows if those editors went to acquire user level permission just to punish other people or make other people worship them? Who knows if they take money too to edit?. I have no business with what they said on their User page about Paid editing. Because even sock accounts do lie as well they have no other account. As for the article creator. I will advise you stay calm and do what is right here on Wikipedia by following it’s guidelines. I have already advised you before but you thought you now know better while speaking on the AFD discussion of Funnybros. I saw the user permission you are now after to. But it’s of no need base on your editing experience. Keep doing what is right here on Wikipedia and have a nice day. As for your article I will check if it’s a keep, delete or I don’t say anything and let other editors do their research. Gabriel (talk to me ) 19:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? C F A 💬 19:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there are lots of non-significant awards like university awards, but you're not going to see significant coverage of those winners and nominees in major newspapers (aside from maybe a human-interest story, but the references here aren't that), so I don't really see what you're getting at. If newspapers are independently choosing to report on winners and nominees – and as far as I can tell, the references are independently written, not paid promotions, even if the loaded language can feel a bit promotional-y – that conveys significance to those awards relative to other awards. (As to your LAFCA rebuttal, awards can exist for decades and still not be notable. Depth of coverage, not longevity, is what matters.) RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. Sources primarily covering the nominees and recipients do not offer WP:SIGCOV of the award itself which is necessary to meet GNG. Just because certain people have received the award does not mean it is automatically eligible for its own article. I'd support a redirect but I can't find a suitable target article. C F A 💬 04:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Check these Sources, Then Check reliable source for Nigerian Related Information. Reference "4" [5]https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/12/kingdom-achievers-award-2023-holds-in-lagos/amp/ and Reference "8" [6]https://championnews.com.ng/kingdom-achievers-award-partners-with-boomplay-music-pulse-ng-in-forthcoming-award-event/, There's a WP:SIGCOV on these source.Madeforall1 (talk) 20:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I see notable and reliable references about the award, All seams to be organic, The article has a significant in-depth coverage about the event, nominations and the winner, meet WP:GNG Feellingfly (talk) 11:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC) — Feellingfly (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The article having significant coverage of the event means nothing for notability. What matters is significant coverage of the subject in independent, reliable sources. An article could be 20 000 words long and cover everything about the topic and still not be notable. C F A 💬 23:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:33, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Though there may not be in-depth information, the article is finely sourced with reputable sources based on the contents provided. It is the only notable Nigerian gospel music award. Deleting it would not help, as it can be improved. Send down the rain (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak keep~~: First, move page to Kingdom Achiever Awards. The 2023 edition made the news. dxneo (talk) 15:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Definitely needs a closer look. dxneo (talk) 17:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Don't let the page title distract you. What matters is if there should be an article here about this subject. Renaming doesn't require an AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : Per nominator reason. Award was just even established in 2022 that means two years ago and annually show up. It is very hard to be called it notable for now as it hasn’t gotten enough significant coverage from independent reliable source rather than the event hold announcement and inheriting of nomination list because they nominated notable people. It can be notable in the future that is if they still exist by then. Meanwhile, they are other Awards Notable here on Wikipedia being won by Nigerian Gospel singers. So am not sure this is the only award to qualify a gospel singer.--Gabriel (……?) 20:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Rohatgi

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

There is not a single direct and in-depth independent secondary article about him. Seems very non-notable business executive, clergy, motivational speaker. WorthWobble (talk) 12:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 12:12, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The CDO of bp, #22 in the Fortune 500, is non-notable figure? 98.118.86.149 (talk) 17:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Without sourcing, yes. Oaktree b (talk) 22:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, hi. I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm just getting my feet wet. I've gone through the tutorials, but I have some questions. Please be patient as I work to better understand, because I'm a bit confused about notability and primary vs. secondary sources.

For example, his link is not enough because it is just stuff from his wiki entry, which is referenced in his profile :https://www.ranker.com/review/roger-rohatgi/33496792?l=101186

This link doesn't work because it isn't an article, just a profile, even though it was a talk run by Harvard Business Review: https://www.alumni.hbs.edu/events/leading-with-ai.aspx

This link isn't enough because it isn't about him, even though he was a speaker for the economist, is this correct?https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2023/10/usc-viterbi-at-the-economist-space-economy-summit-in-los-angeles/

This video doesn't work because it is a primary source, as it is a recording of him speaking

This is a secondary source, but because he is only mentioned as a speaker, but it isn't about him, this wouldn't make the cut, correct? https://medium.com/techsonar/my-thoughts-on-the-iot-world-and-ai-summit-2022-in-austin-tx-131addde76b2

This article is an interview with him, which makes it Primary, even though there is a transcript. Are transcripts primary or secondary? https://www.designit.com/stories/point-of-view/design-the-future-featuring-roger-rohatgi

As a follow up to the above link, it is also a Podcast where he is brought on to be interviewed. That makes the Podcast primary, correct?

This blurb is technically a secondary source, but it has information that can be found elsewhere. What I mean is: I've read this while searching for these links. It is too short to count, right? https://augmentedenterprisesummit.com/speakers/2024-roger-rohatgi/

Same for this, correct? https://www.rca.ac.uk/research-innovation/research-centres/helen-hamlyn-centre/session-6-social-sustainability-the-role-of-inclusive-design/

This is too close because he literally works at bp: https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/careers/life-at-bp/our-stories/rogers-story.html

I'm not saying that this is a great example, but would this be a secondary source?

I apologize for the wall of text, but since there were vet editors here, I thought I should ask. These links were found with ChatGPT, but Wikipedia editing is my new rabbit hole :) Illunadin (talk) 20:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, sorry. One last question. This is secondary, but it doesn't actually provide much ABOUT him, just what he said. Should these be considered? https://www.wired.com/story/fast-forward-the-chatbots-are-now-talking-to-each-other/ Illunadin (talk) 20:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same as above. It mentions his job and role, but it isn't about him in particular, correct? https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/blog/2024/01/24/bring-virtual-connections-to-life-with-microsoft-mesh-now-generally-available-in-microsoft-teams/ Illunadin (talk) 20:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Little to no coverage of this person, this is about all there is [7], Oaktree b (talk) 22:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Redirect to bb article. Seems like he initially began his career as a film director and received a notable award, which satisfies WP:ANYBIO criteria. And later, he shifted his career focus and went on to win also the Oracle CX Innovation Award. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.241.147.18 (talk) 14:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 15:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: as nom said, there's nearly no WP:SIGCOV about this individual. Also, WP:ANYBIO requires a well-known and significant award, which the "Oracle CX innovation award" is not, and as for the bare bones festival award, I'm doubtful as to its notability (and anyways I can't find any trace of it anywhere). — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Online sources only? Illunadin (talk) 20:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Finnieston distillery

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

Don't meet notability criteria and not enough citations to reliable sources. Frederik daomos (talk) 15:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

del insufficient coverage. - Altenmann >talk 16:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pure (programming language)

AfDs for this article:

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

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

Comment: I should also add that Albert Graef is the creator of the language -- sources created by them or their close affiliates shouldn't be considered for establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. A lot of the previous AfD arguments were based on non-arguments such as "under active development", "unique language", and "not an orphan". IntGrah (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saving Grace (Philippine TV series)

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

Case of WP:TOOSOON. Plenty of casting announcements but no filming. Churnalism and other unreliable sources but show was just announced and is "planned to air" in 2025. CNMall41 (talk) 15:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. CNMall41 (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The show already commence filming we will update the production details for reference. Also the announcement for 2025 airing is based on the network's statement however, exact date has not been discussed Tyamutz (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of NordStar destinations

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

Fails WP:NOT, WP:NCORP, and common sense.

Common sense is failed because this is largely a listing of where this airline does not regularly fly to, since most of the destinations are listed as "terminated" or "seasonal". What little encyclopaedic content there may be here is already summarised at the parent article.

WP:NOT is failed because this is a complete listing of the services of a company. As such it is excluded under WP:NOTCATALOG no. 6 which states that "Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services". It is also an indiscriminate listing - all destinations are listed even if the airline no longer flies there - and so excluded under WP:IINFO.

WP:NCORP (which applies to the services of companies as well as the companies themselves) is failed because the only sources provided in this article come directly from the airline. Either the information is taken directly from the company website, or (as in the ATO.ru and om1.ru sources) they are based on company press-releases. Links to Euronews, the BBC, and New York Times are included but these do not mention the airline at all - instead they are used to support the WP:OR conclusion that various NordStar flights are terminated.

There is no evidence here at all that this is a notable topic, with significant coverage in reliable, 3rd-party, independent sources that meet WP:ORGIND. Even a WP:SPLITLIST has to have stand-alone notability per WP:AVOIDSPLIT and this does not.

Finally this fails WP:V because whilst this is supposedly a listing of destinations served as of February 2021, none of the sources are from that date - they are all years before or years after it. FOARP (talk) 15:38, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Aviation, Lists, and Russia. FOARP (talk) 15:38, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Join Java

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP: N. I can't find any additional sources that would establish notability (i.e. that aren't written by the designer of the programming language). HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The previous AfD gives some sources that could be used, but they're mostly brief descriptions in papers/presentations. There's one source that writes about two paragraphs about the language, but the paper is so awfully written (obvious formatting errors and the actual content about Join Java is copy-pasted from the Wikipedia article itself) that I wouldn't be very comfortable writing an entire article around it. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The sources given in the previous AfD do not provide substantial coverage. IntGrah (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kai Trump

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

A minor member of the extended Trump clan who has no history beyond a speech at the GOP convention. Probably ought to redirect to Dad's list of offspring given that except for the one sentence its all either very basic tabloid/royal-watcher detail or is about other people. Not seeing any independent notability and I don't see having a WP:BLP on a minor child on the basis of one public appearance. Mangoe (talk) 14:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Baron wasn't notable here at the last AfD and he at least has some sort of notability... A grandchild is even less so, they're still a high school student, no different than thousands of others, having a famous grandparent isn't notable. Oaktree b (talk) 16:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NINHERITED. Aside from one public appearance, all this individual has for notability is being the grandchild of Trump, but notability is not inherited. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Politics, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Notability is not inherited. Procyon117 (talk) 20:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bent Flyvbjerg

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

GNG - non-notable researcher lacks significant coverage, in both reliable and non-reliable sources. Article seems autobiographical, with 20/25 sources being written by the subject. Couruu (talk) 12:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Sources do not establish notability. Also note that this person is the subject of an extensive promotional campaign of citespam and other articles (see Making Social Science Matter on his book). See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sonderbro/Archive for more info on the socks, including the creator of the biographical article. - MrOllie (talk) 12:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Denmark. Shellwood (talk) 12:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Although this article needs significant alteration and removal of unreliable sources in places, the subject is the Villum Kann Rasmussen Professor, a named professorship, at IT University of Copenhagen. This seems to me to meet C5 of WP:NPROF, which is sufficient to establish notability. Again, the article needs substantial editing but the subject appears to be notable. Qflib (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Philosophy, Economics, Geography, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ciesse Piumini

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

Promotion. Fails WP:NCORP. CresiaBilli (talk) 12:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sports, and Italy. CresiaBilli (talk) 12:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP. There are at least two reliable, independent sources showing significant coverage of the subject in the article: [8][9]. This is enough to satisfy WP:NCORP without even needing an additional WP:BEFORE search. CresiaBilli can you maybe better motivate your nomination? Broc (talk) 12:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Broc. The references are present to establish passage of NCORP and any concerns regarding promotional content can be addressed via editing. Frank Anchor 15:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moppi Productions

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources and what's linked in the article doesn't establish notability. There isn't significant coverage of the group in Freax: The Brief History of the Demoscene, Volume 1 (2005) by Tamás Polgár [hu], only a single mention. One can find mentions elsewhere, like in this Tivi (magazine) [fi] article. According to a licentiate thesis, "Kurki (2002, p.57–62) used Moppi Productions as a case example when discussing developing visual styles", but I wasn't able to access the work. toweli (talk) 12:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Visual arts, Organizations, Computing, and Finland. toweli (talk) 12:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Kurki (2002) is available here (in Finnish). Adam Sampson (talk) 15:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Institute for Computer Science and Control

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

Nothing in this article suggests it passes WP:GNG or WP:NORG. Most references seem to be to the entity itself. My BEFORE doesn't help much, although sources might exist in Hungarian. The article has a big list of external links, in Hungarian, for anyone who cares to review them (they don't have English titles or publisher information or such). Hungarian wiki article seems to have more content but even fewer references than we do :( _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Hungary. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article seems promotional, many of the sources link back to the institute's own website, and I'm unable to find articles online to be used as additional sources. Ternera (talk) 15:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MTA SZTAKI Laboratory of Parallel and Distributed Systems

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

The whole article currently relies on primary sources. Also, I am not convinced that a research laboratory of a university and/or a research institute needs a separate article, since there are no major achievements for this. All relevant information can be easily migrated to MTA SZTAKI; therefore, the article can be either completely deleted or, more suitably, merged with MTA SZTAKI. Chiserc (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Chiserc (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Institute for Computer Science and Control, which also has dubious notability as written. This is just a spammy catalogue entry with no indications of WP:GNG. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Institute for Computer Science and Control is also nominated at an AFD discussion and MTA SZTAKI is a redirect to that article, too. Is there another possible target article that isn't up for deletion? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: S
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Saipan International (badminton)

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

Fails WP:GNG, WP:SIGCOV and WP:EVENT. The winners are already covered in base article Saipan International (badminton).zoglophie^•talk• 06:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Badminton, Oceania, and United States of America. zoglophie^•talk• 06:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:02, 18 July 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 speedy delete‎. Deleted by Deb as "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion". (non-admin closure) ArcticSeeress (talk) 14:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Premium Guard Inc

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

Premium Guard Inc.

This article on an automotive filter company is written from the company's point of view, and says what the company says about itself, rather than what third parties say about the company. It does not satisfy general notability or corporate notability. The three references are all press releases.

Reference Number	Reference	Comments	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Secondary
1	www.counterman.com	A press release about the name change, in a trade publication	No	Yes	Yes	No
2	www.freightwaves.com	Transmission, a twice-weekly newsletter about auto supply networks. About moving facilities to Mexico. Reads like a press release.	No	Not really	Yes	No
3	www.aftermarketnews.com	A press release to a trade publication, about an acquisition.	No	Yes	Yes	No

The first sentence after the lede is

Established in New York City, Premium Guard Inc.’s focus from the start has been on providing a turnkey solution with wide application coverage and private label programs for all segments of the North American automotive aftermarket.

That reads like marketing buzzspeak. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Transportation, and New York. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:59, 18 July 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.

Any.do

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

It does not fall under NORG guidelines. Any reliable sources? LusikSnusik (talk) 10:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Management, Software, Websites, and Israel. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep by the GNG and also procedural keep, as no valid reason for deletion was brought forward. The intro says It does not fall under NORG guidelines. Any reliable sources?, however this is an article about a TECHNOLOGY not about a company. So NORG does not apply. "Any reliable sources?" is a slap in the face of the BEFORE requirements. That's to the procedural keep. To the keep, this is an easy keep because of the large number of reviews of the technology in prime publications. Such reviews are almost by definition in depth and original as the journalist RESEARCHES the tool. gidonb (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: despite what @Gidonb: says, this was "co-founded" and is explicitly designated in the article as "the company", so you can hardly say WP:NORG doesn't apply here. As to the "procedural keep", Any reliable sources? can also be a way of formulating the often-made query of "I haven't found any reliable sources. If anyone finds some, please ping me". Refs 1, 2 and 8 (techcrunch) are promotional ("beautifully designed", etc.) or very short, 3 (linkedin) is not independent, 4 (the next web)'s reliability is disputed, 5 (interview of co-founder) is not independent, 7 is a name-drop. This leaves 6 (the verge) as the only independent, reliable, and significant source, but notability guidelines do say sources, plural, so a single source isn't enough for notability. Also to Gidonb: you say you've found large number of reviews. I would appreciate if you could give some links to these, per WP:SOURCESEXIST. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was withdrawn‎. —Ingenuity (t • c) 15:38, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Erigo

AfDs for this article:

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

The fashion brand does not fall under NORG guidelines. Perhaps TOOSOON. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed this AfD where more sources were added. I withdraw my nomination. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erigo LusikSnusik (talk) 10:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 18 July 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.

Kungu Al-Mahadi Adam

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

Not notable journalist and failing to meet ANYBIO LusikSnusik (talk) 10:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Radio, Television, and Uganda. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edgar Chibaka

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

should be deleted due to the lack of significant independent coverage that meets the General Notability Guideline (GNG), relying instead on primary sources, company related news and not significant mentions. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Africa, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Subject has enough WP:GNG. For example here reported by the Telegraph, subject won the Black British Business Person of the Year award in 2021. I also found this where subject is being the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Malawi's leading online publication, the Nyasa Times that he found in 2006. This could be used to sustain the article per (WP:NEXIST)--Tumbuka Arch (talk) 13:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Ukraine International Airlines destinations

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

Fails WP:NOT, WP:NCORP, and common sense.

Common sense is failed because this is a listing of where this airline does not fly to. As is stated in the second line "all flights are terminated". Even if it weren't, UIA is a charter airline, so when it was flying it would have gone anywhere you would have paid them to fly to. In as much as this page has any encyclopaedic content at all, it is already described at the main page about the airline so this is a duplication.

WP:NOT is failed because this is a complete listing of the services of a company. As such it is excluded under WP:NOTCATALOG no. 6 which states that "Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services". It is also an indiscriminate listing - all destinations are listed even if the airline no longer flies there - and so excluded under WP:IINFO.

WP:NCORP (which applies to the services of companies as well as the companies themselves) is failed because the only sources provided in this article come directly from the airline - either the company website or reports of press-releases, or aggregators like Routesonline that re-post brief company statements. None of these are significant coverage even if they were independent. There is no evidence here at all that this is a notable topic, with significant coverage in reliable, 3rd-party, independent sources that meet WP:ORGIND. Even a WP:SPLITLIST has to have stand-alone notability per WP:AVOIDSPLIT and this does not. FOARP (talk) 09:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Aviation, Lists, and Ukraine. FOARP (talk) 09:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Niharika Lyra Dutt

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability issue Thewikizoomer (talk) 08:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Dance, Television, Theatre, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: I do not really see any notability issues here. The subject person has officially credited lead roles in TV series like Paatal Lok[10], Choona[11], and an upcoming series Call Me Bae[12], as well as supporting roles in projects like Music Teacher[13] and Sutliyan[14], which clearly fulfills the NACTOR#1. Besides, The Hindustan Times interview, as well as sources from Times of India, Indian Express, and Yahoo! News that are currently cited in the article have also clearly demonstrated that the subject person has fulfilled GNG. It does not even require a BEFORE, as the information presented in the article is already sufficient to show that the subject person has fulfilled two notability guidelines. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 11:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete, interviews do not help establish notability. Also, Times of India is not suitable for a biography. — 48 JCL 16:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NACTOR has clearly been fulfilled but not addressed. And yes, a single interview source itself does not establish notability. But if there are multiple interviews covering a breadth of different topics, this can count towards notability per WP:IV. I am not sure about Times of India, but even if it is excluded, there are still multiple interviews from The Hindustan Times, The Indian Express, or Mid-Day[15], which have fulfilled this requirement imo. Still an obvious keep to me. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 19:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment— I agree wholeheartedly with Prince of Erebor. These are absolutely reliable sources. She is a main cast member in the television show mentioned in the article.
9t5 (talk) 04:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- She is 'way down the cast list (not in the top 6 actors listed) in either Paatal Lok or Choona, or in the streaming/web projects, so not an obviously notable career on the face of it. I am not sure whether any of the articles cited are really WP:RSs. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sources I provided show that she is credited as main cast, and they are from The Indian Express, The Hindu, and Variety. I do not believe these three sources have any concerns regarding their reliability. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 19:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — The subject is clearly a member of the main cast. If you want to argue that a recurring or guest appearance isn’t notable, that’s understandable. However, this actress is a main cast member. The article needs strengthening not deletion.

9t5 (talk) 23:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers, I've done a source assessment. — 48 JCL 23:37, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Strong Keep- I ~~disagree~~ strongly disagree with 48JCL. If someone is interviewed by the New York Times, that would make a person mighty notable. You cannot say “interviews don’t prove notability” when that is ~~plainly~~ outrageously untrue.

9t5 (talk) 22:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, @9t5, they were not interviewed by the New York Times.
[1] -- From WP:TOI: "The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It has a bias in favor of the Indian government and is known to accept payments from persons and entities in exchange for positive coverage." Seeing how promotional the article is, I think it is fair to say that this does not help establish notability.
[2] -- From WP:IV#Independence: "Alice Expert talks about herself, her actions, or her ideas: non-independent source." This is basically what the Hindustan Times article discusses. It is fine for a WP:BLP (I think) but It does not establish notability.
[3] -- Another interview.
[4] -- IMDb, not reliable. Per WP:IMDb
[5] -- Another interview.
[6] -- Another interview.
[7] -- Passing mention.
[8] -- Passing mention. — 48 JCL 23:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment— so you’re saying if it were the NYT then interviews can count? You wrote, and I quote, “interviews do not help establish notability.” It seems that you made a wildly incorrect assertion as justification for your delete vote. Have you done the proper research into the Indian outlet to determine that it is not reliable?

9t5 (talk) 04:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

48JCL Then tag the article with {{verify}}? This is a ridiculous use of AfD. 9t5 (talk) 04:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still do not see any address on NACTOR. The subject person has at least three officially credited main roles. GNG does not override SNG. They are companion guidelines, and fulfilling either one is already sufficient in the first place.

I am also unclear on the purpose of your source analysis. I have already analysed them when I cast my !vote and explained why I believe the interviews can serve as evidence of notability per WP:IV. Besides, you have misidentified sources 7 and 8. They are clearly proving the subject person's involvement in certain projects, and are being used to flesh out the article, not to demonstrate SIGCOV on the subject person, just like the five sources I provided in this discussion. I believe I have made a strong case for why this is an obvious keep, and I have not seen any rebuttals directed to my arguments at all, despite the various comments. (Probably because it is inarguable that the subject person has significant roles, given their numerous credited main parts.) —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 05:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I think 9t5 was raising a hypothetical question, asking what if someone has been interviewed by a reputable source, instead of claiming that the subject person has been interviewed by the NYT. I do not fully agree with this, given that interviews are generally regarded as PS and do not necessarily count towards notability on their own. However, if a person has been interviewed by multiple reputable media outlets like NYT+WSJ+WaPo, this could serve as evidence of notability, and I think this makes sense. You may go ahead and argue that WP:IV is an essay or whatnot, but I doubt that would be a strong and well-reasoned position. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 05:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prince of Erebor I simply interpret policies a lot more leniently than 48JCL, and am allowed to do so as per WP:5P5. I have been involved in debate with 48JCL before. We are a pretty equal match. Just two different points of view. I respect their dedication to the project. 9t5 (talk) 06:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
9t5 and Prince of Erebor, I completely agree that WP:IV makes sense. However, from WP:IV: but a person does not pass GNG if interviews are the only kind of sourcing they have. Also, Prince of Erebor, those sources you provided are passing mentions and do not count towards notability. — 48 JCL 11:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@48JCL: I have already mentioned three times in this discussion - the sources I provided are to prove that the subject person has officially credited main/supporting roles in the respective projects, instead of providing SIGCOV about the person. The five roles I have listed already showed that the subject person has fulfilled NACTOR#1, and a Keep is the only reasonable conclusion. The interviews are only additional evidence of notability, since I have noticed many Wikipedians often bring up "coverage" in cases where the subject person has already fulfilled SNG, and this part is to satisfy their concerns. I still do not see any rebuttals on why the subject person fails NACTOR in your multiple replies, and the fact that you now agree the interviews can count towards notability even makes this case not borderline, but a strong Keep. Are you sure you do not want to change your stance, given that your arguments seem to be quite affirmative to a keep rather than a delete? —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 12:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mayank Shekhar

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

Article does not meet WP:GNG and WP:JOURNALIST. Subject did receive an award Ramnath Goenka Award for Excellence in Journalism. Source 1 is a book review, source 2 is a blog, source 3 has a passing comment made by the subject himself, source 4 is a review by subject himself, source 5 is a bio written by subject himself, source 6 is more on bio written by subject himself, source 7 is a link to Ramnath Goenka Award and source 8 is a book written by subject himself. Many unreliable and primary sources here. Draftify would be an option to improve the page with secondary independent sources and remove primary sources like the reviews by the subject himself and the interview with the subject.RangersRus (talk) 15:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the award is judged significant enough, he could meet WP:ANYBIO. If his books have received coverage that is judged sufficiently significant (including the review you mention, or https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/name-place-animal-thing-of-bollywood-trivia-popular-culture/articleshow/52685080.cms or https://www.spectralhues.com/news/bookreview-name-place-animal-thing-mayank-shekhar/), he might also meet WP:AUTHOR. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TOI makes it under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. I still do not find his books a significant monument or been a substantial part of a significant exhibition or won wide significant critical attention by well known peers and critics in secondary independent sources. RangersRus (talk) 18:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TOI falling under NEWSORGINDIA is an interpretation that I respect but with which I disagree in this case (not great journalism but not simply unreliable). The fact that the author of the book is one of the film critics of the Hindustan Times also indicates the article in the TOI should be rather independent.-- -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank: The article from TOI doesn't look like a review at all; it seems more like a promotional piece or an announcement. Additionally, the article was published by PTI. I don't think he meets WP:AUTHOR. GrabUp - Talk 16:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note about the Times of India: The Sources noticeboard says not to use it for political subject matters for example, which the Indian task force clarifies: "Uncontroversial content such as film reviews are usable". Consensus is that concern about retributed coverage exists, but not to the point of making it unreliable. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Note: TOI has trivia (likely promotion) from the subject's book and is not a review that I glanced over again and spectralhues.com is likely unreliable source as it says "Spectral Hues has been founded by a couple of starry-eyed romantics with their feet firmly planted on the ground (a rather unusual combination, we know!)." This is not a well established news media or website. About The Times of India, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources says The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It has a bias in favor of the Indian government and is known to accept payments from persons and entities in exchange for positive coverage. So this puts in question the promotion by using trivia taken from the book written by the subject. RangersRus (talk) 14:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, Film, and India. RangersRus (talk) 15:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - clearly notable; a prolific film critic who is also known for his in-depth interviews with major film stars. The Ramnath Goenka Award for Excellence in Journalism is no mean achievement, and he is the first film critic to have received it. I have added a reference for an interview with him for the The Asian Age. At best, the article needs expansion, certainly not deletion. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Shshshsh (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

Indeed, I should have mentioned that I hapeen to have been the creator of this page many years back. I actually didn't even remember I was the one who created it, as I've created numerous pages for notable Indian film critics. As someone who has worked on Indian cinema-related articles, I can attest to the relevance of his reviews on dozens of film articles, including several FAs. Him being an author as well as the winner of a notable award only consolidates my position. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
interviews are primary sources that needs to cite the truth of the statements unless attributed. RangersRus (talk) 11:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RangersRus: Didn't undersrtand what you said here, please explain. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interviews are considered primary non-independent source. Independent sources helps to fairly portray the subject, without undue attention to the subject's own views. If you use interviews as source for any statement made by the subject then the subject's statements needs to be cited with secondary independent source as well. Wikipedia:Independent sources. RangersRus (talk) 14:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shshshsh: The award “Ramnath Goenka Excellence in Journalism Awards” is given to over 20 people every year. Do you think this is an exclusive award that can make recipients notable? GrabUp - Talk 16:15, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grabup: Yes; there are many notable awards which award several groups of individuals. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shshshsh: Hey, Thanks for the reply. Can you please name some! GrabUp - Talk 12:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grabup: Yes, off the top of my head - the Padma Shri. Not comparing them in notability, but just giving a direct answer to your question. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shshshsh: Padma Shri does not establish notability. I wanted the names of some awards that establish notability and are given to more than 20 people every year. GrabUp - Talk 15:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, see my reply to nomination above.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly notable.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep very much notable, as pointed out above. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 09:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am not convinced that he meets any notability criteria. He fails WP:ANYBIO, as the award is not exclusive, with more than 20 people receiving it. Receiving the award first or last does not make it exceptional or add to notability. Regarding WP:AUTHOR, The Times of India is not a review, merely a short promotional or announcement piece with no author, published by the Press Trust of India (PTI), therefore, it does not meet WP:AUTHOR criteria. The person does not meet the General Notability Guideline, which is already known. Also, I don't understand how interviews with celebrities establish notability. GrabUp - Talk 09:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the award is a notable national award as per WP:Anybio and having specific award categories does not invalidate that in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ramnath Goenka Award is not national award. It is award named after journalist Ramnath Goenka that began in 2006 and is awarded to over 20 journalists every year and is presented by Indian Express Group. RangersRus (talk) 22:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Closer. Keep votes are more focused on the subject's notability because of an award (not national award) but there is no argument on the unreliability of the sources on the page that are blogs, interviews with no secondary sources as attribution and self written reviews by the subject himself and part of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Two keep votes consider him notable but have no argument as to why and the two other keep vote (including the creator of the page) do not have opinion on the argument about the page and the unreliable sources that fails WP:GNG. I think the page is at best Delete but Draftify is also an option if there is any scope of improvement with secondary independent reliable sources. If this page stays a keep, then likely it opens a Pandora box to use unreliable sources like blogs and interviews and self published reviews on other pages or newly generated pages. RangersRus (talk) 22:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note @RangersRus is the nominator of this AfD and appears to have voted twice (assuming good faith), both in the nomination description and in the comment above. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are not votes but opinion based on the unreliability of the sources on the page. RangersRus (talk) 14:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really don’t understand why they are not providing good arguments for their Keep votes. It looks like @Atlantic306 is just here to go along with the majority. The question raises because how can he call it a ‘national award’? Additionally, they are posting low effort delete votes and not giving any counterarguments, which raises some questions in my mind. GrabUp - Talk 02:08, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grabup: Please assume good faith on other participants here. The fact that they do not agree with you doesn't mean their arguments are not "good". This is an AfD where no one is obligated to satisfy his voting peers. Shahid • ^Talk2me 12:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are not obligated to satisfy me, but to build consensus, they should explain further why and how the subject meets some notability criteria. Being a "National award" does not establish notability, such as the Padmashri Award, which is a national award, but the majority of the recipients are not notable and don’t have articles. Giving low effort votes does not really help to build consensus in every AfDs. GrabUp - Talk 13:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In the UK and US a national award means it relates to the scope of a whole country not that it is given by the government. For example the Oscars and Grammy Awards are national awards that are given by private organisations, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  For UK and US, there is national award for films National Film Awards UK and National Film & TV Award USA. In India, for journalism, Press Council of India honours the journalists selected by the Jury/Council for having excelled in various fields on the occasion of National Press Day. This is national award. RangersRus (talk) 15:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  The award is not exclusive enough to establish notability. Every year, more than 20 people receive the award. Are they also notable for this award? I don’t think so. GrabUp - Talk 16:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Yes, they might be notable. The UK Awards are given by a private organization. National, especially in the Indian context, means the recepients may be chosen from across all states and not just locally. The Ramnath Goenka Award is given by a notable organization which has existed for almost a century. The award might not necessarily establish notability in and of itself (although I think it should), but everything else about the subject certainly does. Shekhar is also a member of the CBFC, he writes for notable publications, he hosts programs where big stars are being interviewed (see Hitlist on YT), he has authored two books which received media coverage. I can't see the harm in having a Wikipedia article on this person even with half of these achievements. I do admit I'm an inclusionist. :) I strongly believe WP can and should cover as much as possible. The spirit of WP, as I think of it, lies in its ongoing goal to become a robust center of knowledge, where minimal restrictions are put on inclusion of information. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  @Shshshsh: Being a member of the CBFC does not meet any notability criteria. Writing for a notable publication does not meet any notability criteria. Hosting big stars in a program or interviewing them does not meet any notability criteria. Lastly, his book has not received enough media coverage to be considered notable, nor have his books been reviewed by any notable media organization that would allow it to meet WP:AUTHOR.
  
  I want to ask where it is written in Wikipedia’s notability guidelines that being a member of the CBFC, writing for a notable publication, hosting big stars in a show, or taking interviews makes a person notable. I don’t have a problem with your intent to include everything on Wikipedia, but there are rules that should be followed. Why keep a subject that has not met any notability criteria set by Wikipedia guidelines? GrabUp - Talk 15:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep seem to be notable and meeting GNG. LusikSnusik (talk) 10:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LusikSnusik: Can you explain how he meets GNG? You should learn about notability before voting on AfD. GrabUp - Talk 10:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Internet Childhood

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

Non-notable compilation album, with all of the sourcing being primary sources or unreliable sources such as Discogs. Fails the general notability guidelines, and the subject-specific NALBUM. λ NegativeMP1 06:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, and Internet. λ NegativeMP1 06:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Living Tombstone: as a WP:ATD since I found no adequate sourcing for this album. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 17:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darkworks

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

Not finding evidence the company passes WP:NCORP; the only sources around, even in gaming magazines, are trivial mentions, corporate announcements and interviews. Almost everything about them is in the context of the Alone in the Dark reboot and I Am Alive. Was created by a WP:SPA and of unclear notability since then, suggesting some level of WP:SPAM. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears relevant for Video games in France: Gamekult" "De "Alone in the Dark" à "I am Alive" : la malheureuse histoire de DarkWorks", "Cinq studios français allient leur force", "Antoine Villette", thegameeffect: "Behind the Scenes: I Am Alive's Development Disaster", Libération. IgelRM (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Alone in the Dark: The New Nightmare - none of the sourcing meets GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (or redirect), as although there are plenty of mentions, especially in french, none of these are both reliable and significant coverage. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Cyprus Airways (1947–2015) destinations

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

Fails WP:NOT, WP:NCORP, and duplicating content that, to the extent that it is encyclopaedic, is already in the main article about the airline.

Taking the last of these first, the main article already gives a summary of the destinations it served. A complete and exhaustive listing is not needed.

WP:NOT is failed because this is a complete listing of the services of a company. As such it is excluded under WP:NOTCATALOG no. 6 which states that "Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services". It is also an indiscriminate listing - all destinations are listed - and so excluded under WP:IINFO.

WP:NCORP is failed because the only sources provided in this article come directly from the airline. FlightRadar24 simply relays airline-provided information (as the page states: "The information provided on this page is a compilation of data from many different sources including flight scheduling systems, airline booking systems, airports, airlines and other third-party data providers"). There is no evidence here at all that this is a notable topic, with significant coverage in reliable, 3rd-party, independent sources that meet WP:ORGIND. Even a WP:SPLITLIST has to have stand-alone notability per WP:AVOIDSPLIT and this does not. FOARP (talk) 08:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Aviation, Lists, and Cyprus. FOARP (talk) 08:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Cyprus Airways - there's no reason for this to be a stand-alone page, but where the airline flew is indeed encyclopedic information. The WP:NOTs cited here really twist the purpose - none of the prongs under WP:NOTCATALOG apply here. WP:NCORP doesn't apply here because it's not an article about a corporation. The nomination also fails to understand what "indiscriminate" means - this is a very discriminate list. However the sourcing isn't there for a stand-alone page, so we can't keep the information at its current location. SportingFlyer T·C 09:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"this is a very discriminate list" - where was any discrimination applied at all here? In what way is this not cover by ""Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services"? WP:NCORP literally states in its very first line that "This page is to help determine whether an organization (commercial or otherwise), or any of its products and services, is a valid subject for a separate Wikipedia article dedicated solely to that organization, product, or service".

I don't understand this combative attitude when you straight up admit that this is yet another airline destination list page that shouldn't exist. FOARP (talk) 09:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand throwing every single WP:NOT into the AfD soup when you could just say that it's not properly sourced enough for a stand-alone article. And a list of every destination served on the last operating day of an airline is clearly discriminate - there is a finite number of entries for a related group of items. SportingFlyer T·C 09:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"a list of every destination served on the last operating day of an airline is clearly discriminate" - this isn't a list of every destination served on the last operating day? This includes destinations that clearly weren't being served on that day since they are "seasonal"? The list is anyway explicitly of destinations the airline might have flown to in November 2014 some months before it folded?

WP:NOT has something like 30 headings and I've mentioned two here and given the reasons for why they are mentioned, so I don't think "throwing every single WP:NOT into the AfD soup" is fair.

If you list every entry in a list regardless of relevance, or whether they were even being flown to at the time in question (were "seasonal" destinations being served in November?) then I don't see where discrimination is being applied. Encyclopaedias are supposed to summarise, not be complete listings of trivia. FOARP (talk) 09:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to be their final scheduled timetable. That's discriminate encyclopedic information as it provides a scope of where the airline flew to before it folded, which is indeed relevant information about airlines. SportingFlyer T·C 11:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how taking the content of a document like this and transposing it on to Wikipedia is discriminate. This schedule was any way just a future plan - one they did not actually fulfil - and so excluded per WP:CRYSTAL. FOARP (talk) 12:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm struggling to understand your definition of "discriminate." SportingFlyer T·C 16:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of DAT destinations

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

Fails WP:NOT, WP:NCORP, and common sense.

Common sense is failed because this is a cargo airline that operates charter flights and as such they will fly whereever you are willing to pay them enough to fly to.

WP:NOT is failed because this is a complete listing of the services of a company. As such it is excluded under WP:NOTCATALOG no. 6 which states that "Listings to be avoided include [...] products and services". It is also an indiscriminate listing - all destinations are listed even if the airline no longer flies there - and so excluded under WP:IINFO.

WP:NCORP is failed because the only sources provided in this article come directly from the airline - either the company website or Airline Routes Maps (an agent) or AeroRoutes (a blog/industry press re-posting brief company statements). None of these are significant coverage even if they were independent. There is no evidence here at all that this is a notable topic, with significant coverage in reliable, 3rd-party, independent sources that meet WP:ORGIND. Even a WP:SPLITLIST has to have stand-alone notability per WP:AVOIDSPLIT and this does not.

A simple statement that DAT operates charter and cargo flights across Europe in the main article is sufficient to cover this, nothing from this article needs to be merged. FOARP (talk) 08:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Aviation, Lists, and Denmark. FOARP (talk) 08:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Samastha Kerala Jem-iyyathul Ulama (of AP Sunnis)

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

The previous history of the organization Samastha Kerala Jem-iyyathul Ulama, which was formed in 1926[16], was corrected on the page In 1989[17], a new organization was formed after resigning from this organization due to differences in ideas And the person who wrote the article made a full correction on the first page intentionally / for his own people (WP:CONFLICT),WP:PE and added the previous established year to the new page and wrote the new page in a promotional style. More content from the first page is also included in the new page ~ Spworld2 (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India, and Kerala~~ Spworld2 (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could not see it there. If it necessary, feel free to add it there too. Neutralhappy (talk) 19:21, 16 July 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 July 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Though Spworld2 says to have included this discussion in the deletion sorting lists for Kerala and India, I could not see it. Is its inclusion necessary there? If yes, you being successful in adding this in deletion sorting lists for organizations and Islam, fee free to add this discussion to the same of Kerala and India. Neutralhappy (talk) 19:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete page on Hitler, USA, Samastha of AP Sunnis and EK Sunnis just because there are people who have COI. Content is to determined using the reliable sources. I am neutral in this. That is why I say "(of AP Sunnis)" and "(EK Sunnis)". Both the AP and EK Sunnis claim their respective Samasthas is the real one. I can show that. So accepting one group's only claim could be CONFLICT OF INTEREST, especially in Wikipedia where Ahmadiyyas are categorised alongside Muslims. Reliable sources call Samastha of AP Sunnis "Samastha Kerala Je-iyyathul Ulama".I am sorry to say calling for its deletion must be nothing other than COI since reliable sources do not support that claim. Neutralhappy (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very reliable The Hindu calls the Samastha of AP Sunnis "Samastha Kerala Jamiyyathul Ulama". There are numerous other sources that say the same. Neutralhappy (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dool News calls Samastha of AP Sunnis a Samastha (AP Samastha).
Mathrubhumi.com calls Samastha of AP Sunnis a Samastha (AP Samastha)
Times of India also calls Samastha of AP Sunnis a Samastha. Moreover this terms the Samastha "Samastha Kerala Jem Iyyathul Ulama"
Scroll.in says there are two different Samasthas
OnManorama.com calls the Samastha of AP Sunnis a Samastha and mentions "Samastha Kerala Jem-iyyathul Ulama"
News 18 says there are two Samasthas.
Arab News calls Samastha of AP Sunnis a "Samastha"
The New Indian Express calls Samastha of AP Sunnis "Samastha Kerala Je-iyyathul Ulama".
Manoramanews.com says there are two Samasthas.
Thejas News calls Kanthapuram's Samatha is Samastha Kerala Je-iyyathul Ulama.
Kerala Kaumudi calls AP Sunnis' Samastha "Samastha Kerala Je-iyyathul Ulama"

Neutralhappy (talk) 13:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasy Viking

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

Essay-like article that relies on WP:SYNTH from mostly unreliable sources. The sources that are reliable are not about Fantasy Vikings, but only used to support some part or argument within the article. Some of this info can be relevant additions in Vikings, Viking Age, Viking revival or historical fantasy, if it's not already there, but Fantasy Viking fails WP:GNG. There may be justification for some kind of broader article about the reception history of Vikings or the Viking Age in popular culture, but I don't think this article can be transformed into that. Ffranc (talk) 08:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I once talked about the title of this article at Talk:Fantasy Viking#Move. I don't think "fantasy viking" is a good title. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That said, wow the sourcing in this article is a lot worse than I remember. I see why this was nominated for deletion. I took a look at earlier versions of the article to see if maybe things were better and they're not. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively to Vikings in popular culture. Surprisingly this title is indeed in use, e.g. in this PhD thesis. But considering some of the problematic sourcing, starting with the content which can be tracked to reliable sources and putting that to the parent topic first, and thinking about spinning it out if ever necessary later, would be my preferred course of action. Daranios (talk) 15:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Vikings#In modern popular culture - This was likely spun out of that section of the main article, and contains essentially the same information. However, given the poor sources being used (not counting the obviously unreliable ones, the sources are generally on real Vikings, or on a very specific aspect of Viking popular culture like their inaccurate helmets), it was not ready to be split out into a separate article. I would suggest redirecting back to the relevant section of the main article, and working on improving that section to determine if a spinout article could work. If one is eventually spun back out, it definitely needs a better article title, though. Rorshacma (talk) 15:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Business Network

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP, nothing is reliable. First reference is also about us page of this company, which cannot be considered reliable in any way. Youknow? (talk) 07:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Singapore. Youknow? (talk) 07:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This seems to be focusing on the Singapore organization only, when most of the Google News coverage I see is for the United States organization(s). Maybe it doesn't need to be deleted, but rearchitected to cover the PRIMARYTOPIC. Jclemens (talk) 21:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

del insufficient independent coverage. - Altenmann >talk 16:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sinfest

AfDs for this article:

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

I initially wanted to wait until either the webcomic concluded, or the most recent source is 10+ years old, but returning talkpage concerns made me decide to start this early. My argument for deletion is WP:SUSTAINED combined with a shift in subject matter of the work covered. The most recent source, a 2016 list entry by Paste, states that it had "recently become a more specific and pointed criticism of the most toxic parts of American exceptionalism," and this is the most up-to-date information we can cite on this webcomic. Sean Kleefield in his 2020 book Webcomics did mention Sinfest as an example, but in his blog he made clear he did not do any research for this. As editors, we have recently tried to expand on Ishida's/Sinfest's recent political and controversial aspects through primary sources, but this got (probably rightfully?) undone. Reliable sources are staying away from Sinfest and we don't know how to cover it anymore: the article is largely about a Sinfest that no longer exists, or only exists buried in its own archives. Typically when sources on a long-running webcomic dry up, it just means it's no longer in the zeitgeist, but I don't think that really applies here: I would perhaps make the vain suggestion that reliable sources don't "want" to consider this work notable. I would like to hear what other editors think of this argument and issue. Note that "this webcomic is bad/harmful" is not a deletion rationale tho. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Webcomics. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. SUSTAINED applies to brief bursts of newspaper coverage: the coverage already in this article passes sustained, with consistent coverage over a period of multiple years. Per WP:NTEMP once something is notable, it is notable for good, and even though the coverage has ceased the past coverage is well, well over sustained. The past Sinfest is the notable sinfest, we do not need to discuss the current one. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Evans (mathematician and engineer)

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

Fails WP:BIO. Difficult to search for such a common name but could find no reliable sourcing of this individual. LibStar (talk) 04:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Environment, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 04:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Mathematics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: "Sciencey person did sciencey things." There is nothing wiki-notable here. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: insufficient indepenent coverage fo WP:GNG. - Altenmann >talk 16:50, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tolu Okojie

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

Non notable chef that fails WP:GNG and WP:Basic. Has received minimal media coverage in reliable media. Only three notable media articles about him exist and of the three, one is interview [18] which does not count for notability leaving only two which is still below minimum requirement for WP:BLP. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 06:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Food and drink. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

del insufficient independent coverage for GNG. - Altenmann >talk 16:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Just not enough coverage for this person. [19], somewhat RS, this is an interview [20] and this in a local newspaper [21]. I don't think have sufficient coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 17:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My Ordinary Life (song)

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

Non-notable song that fails the general notability guideline. Source 1 and 2 are certifications (which don't automatically make a song notable), 3 and 4 are passing mentions that fail significant coverage, 5 is unreliable per WP:WHOSAMPLED, and 6 is a primary source (exclusively an interview) that only mentions the song once. All material worth keeping for this article is already included in the article for the band itself. λ NegativeMP1 06:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. λ NegativeMP1 06:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jasmine Sherman

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

Sherman is a political candidate, and all coverage of them stems from that candidacy. If they are ultimately successful, an article can be created. Could be mentioned in Third-party and independent candidates for the 2024 United States presidential election or Green_Party_of_Alaska#Elections but I don't see any other path to biographical notability. Star Mississippi 02:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, United States of America, and Alaska. Star Mississippi 02:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - She's a legitimate candidate, duly elected by the Green Party of Alaska. All the other past years Green Party of Alaska candidates have their own Wikipedia articles. I don't see how we can delete this candidate's article, if the Green Parity has nominated her. It could be argued to delete, but Wikipedia doesn't come across well if they disqualify the officially elected candidates. — Maile (talk) 03:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being nominated by a minor party in a single state does not equate in any way to automatic notability. Curbon7 (talk) 03:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They don't even have ballot access and have been decertified so I'm not even sure duly elected is accurate in this case. If you think WP:NPOLITICIAN needs addressing, I'd be thrilled to have that discussion somewhere appropriate, but that doesn't make a case for Sherman but rather for further cleanup. Star Mississippi 10:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ETA on GPA OSE: Cynthia McKinney was a six term House member, Jill Stein received extensive coverage outside of her campaign and then we have Jesse Ventura and Ralph Nader. (David Cobb may need discussion, it takes more of a look than a quick scan). Jasmine Sherman has not yet attained coverage the way any of these have. I know you know this, you've been here approximately forever. But I still don't see merit here. Star Mississippi 11:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to 2024 Green Party presidential primaries. The AK state party's previous candidates were also national candidates or otherwise notable outside this nomination. All coverage is about her participation in the primary, for which she got a whopping 72 votes, rather than substantively biographical. Reywas92^Talk 13:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable minor political candidate, long way from notability. Oaktree b (talk) 17:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doust (film)

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

I cannot find any mention about this film, not even in the references in the article. I suspect it may be a spelling mistake and in that case a redirect to Dost (1944 film) would be called for. But that is my speculation. As it stands, without any real references, the topic fails WP:GNG Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 02:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 02:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
del per nom: the article contans no any info that could identify the film, not to say to establish its notability.- Altenmann >talk 16:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TJ Rovinka

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

This is a long-unsourced article of a football club that seems to have never played in the highest Slovak First Football League. I can't find any significant coverage of this club that meets WP:GNG. My Google searches, even with "site:.sk" next to the club's name, only come up with club's official website and match reports, the former of which is not independent. Corresponding article on Slovak Wikipedia has been tagged for notability issues for years, which certainly may not help copy over English article. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 09:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 09:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The team played on the third tier continuously from 2014 to 2022, and participated in the national cup. That's usually more than enough to merit inclusion. They might not be called "TJ Rovinka" in the coverage, probably just Rovinka. Geschichte (talk) 20:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of football clubs in Slovakia, where it can be added. That article is in need of an update/clean up anyway... Giant Snowman 18:11, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The list page seems to fail WP:NLIST, so I suggest someone nominate it for deletion too or alternatively redirect to Football in Slovakia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:42, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep A list of Sportnet articles show the club has been consistently covered in local press in spite of refusing a promotion recently: [22] SportingFlyer T·C 21:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of them are paywalled, though. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't matter. SportingFlyer T·C 12:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of football clubs in Slovakia per above. This is an awful article with almost nothing behind it. Anwegmann (talk) 01:02, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article notability is based on the overall notability of the topic, not the state of the article. SportingFlyer T·C 09:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could we get more evaluation of the local coverage brought up by SportingFlyer and whether or not it is enough to satisfy our notability guidelines?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 15:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of football clubs in Slovakia – Per above. Svartner (talk) 08:15, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the Sportnet coverage that SportingFlyer points seems in-depth to me - there's many, many articles - but that's only one publications. But there's other sources out there as well, and frequent coverage of their matches. one two. Nfitz (talk) 17:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bratislavský Futbalový Zväz looks like a blogspot to me... ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 09:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Had a good look for sources, plus information in general about this team. They most likely never played in the second tier of Slovak football either. Sport.sk seems to have nothing about them at all. Looking at the SME sources provided by SportingFlyer, I have summarized details of those references to aid the discussion here.

Sources linked on page discussed above by SportingFlyer
Article	Overview	"more than a trivial mention"
Osobnosť majstra nominovali takmer všetci. Ako vyzerá ideálna jedenástka IV. ligy Bratislava?	Club managers of the fourth-tier league chose their ideal league XI at the end of the 2023-24 season. One of Rovinka's players made it on the list.	No
Bude mať Inter na drese meno trénera súpera? Lembakoali sa teší na strašiaka súťaže	Discusses Rovinka having won the fourth tier in 2023 and refused promotion to the third level.	Yes
O tretiu ligu sa na západe strhol boj. Rovinka odmietla postup, kto ju nahradí?	Discusses Rovinka having refused promotion from the 2022–23 fourth tier, Bratislava league.	Yes
Spolu dali 81 gólov. Ako vyzerá ideálna jedenástka IV. ligy Bratislava?	Discusses team of the season for the 4th division (2022-23 season).	No
Pripravovali sa v akadémii Slovana. Na jar hrajú takmer stále doma a valcujú	Discusses Rovinka having won the 4th-tier league and having played 9 of the first 11 matches in the second half of the season at home.	Yes
IV. liga BFZ: Jeseň prežili v unimobunke. Napriek tomu sú prví a prekonal ich len Neapol	Review of the first half of 2022-23 fourth-tier season.	Yes
Hral za Petržalku a Slovan, pribrzdili ho zranenia. Teraz exceluje v štvrtej lige	Player interview.	No
Jesenný líder hral doma iba štyri zápasy. Na vlastný štadión sa vrátil po dvoch rokoch	Review of the first half of 2022-23 fourth-tier season.	Yes
VIDEO: Rozhodca zostal v šoku. Hráč sadol „na koňa“ a chcel skórovať	In a match against Rovinka, one opposition player got a piggy-back from a team-mate while their team was preparing to take a corner. The referee blew his whistle.	No
Klub z piatej ligy je v osemfinále pohára. Znie to ako sen, teší sa manažér	A team from the fifth tier beat Rovinka in the national cup.	No
Zaskočili velikánov. Ďalšie prekvapenia pandémia nedovolí	COVID eliminated all non-professional teams remaining in the 2020–21 Slovak Cup.	No
Senzácia v pohári. Fortunaligista vypadol s amatérmi	Amateur team Rovinka knocked fully-pro side Senica out of the national cup.	Yes

For me there are 6 instances (some overlapping) where I would argue for it being more than a trivial mention – see third column. In addition to the SME sources, the first source from Nfitz in their comment above (Deník) discusses a 2017 "Super Cup" match between winners of regional cups in the Czech Republic versus Slovakia. According to that, Rovinka played in that on account of having won the Bratislava football association cup beforehand, which I found a primary source for here. All in all, I feel this scrapes WP:GNG. More sources may of course exist. C 679 15:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Opinion is divided between Redirect and Keep, no support for a Deletion. It would be helpful to get feedback on the source analysis which seems to indicate adequate coverage.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mama Lion

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBAND. Sources only mentioned in passing. Don't appear to have any charted or had a significant impact. Mdann52 (talk) 11:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Mdann52 (talk) 11:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Coverage in newspapers. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of that appears unrelated to the band. Mdann52 (talk) 14:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those are a few minor gig announcements for this band, a few gig announcements for a different band, and a couple about lions in a zoo. Not useful for our purposes. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ATD: Merge or redirect to Lynn Carey, although that article has several issues on its own. Geschichte (talk) 19:46, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I recommend notability discussions for band members Lynn Carey and Neil Merryweather too. Both articles are based on long histories that really happened but were rarely reported upon, and are written like fan biographies. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - They really existed and released a couple of albums, but unfortunately I can find little evidence that they received significant and reliable media coverage during their time. The current citations are for a one-paragraph album review, placeholders with no info in AllMusic, and a brief mention of a song being placed in a movie. They were mentioned occasionally in laundry lists of bands that worked with certain producers or at certain studios ([23], [24]), and a controversial album cover comes up sometimes in books about other controversies ([25]). In the Internet era they have a few bloggy notices of the "lost classic" variety ([26], [27]). Alas, I simply can't find enough reliable info with which to build an encyclopedic and biographical WP article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:58, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probable Keep, at worst a merge to Neil Merryweather (which should survive these proceedings). The article already cites a short but independent Billboard review from 1972, and they also were covered by Penthouse contemporaneously ([28]) and Ink 19 more recently ([29]). That's enough for this to no longer be about AfD and instead to be about ATD. Chubbles (talk) 05:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both proposed Merge target articles are also the subjects of AFD discussions so they are not ideal Merge target article candidates. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, please see my comments about proposed Merge target articles which have also been sent to AFD. Right now, I don't see a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not enough reliable WP:SIGCOV. @Chubbles:: your penthouse link does not work, except for stating it was found once, which may as well be a namedrop. Ink19 does not look reliable. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 17:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayeah Games

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

I am not seeing evidence that this studio passes WP:NCORP. It was created by a WP:SPA so it seems like open and shut WP:SPAM unless someone can bring up evidence it is notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No significant independent coverage ~~except for a single article about its game published before the game was even released. This article was copied across a few websites.~~ The article appears to be based on a press release, so even that coverage is not independent. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shabana Shajahan Aryan

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

Previously deleted and salted as Shabana Shajahan/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shabana Shajahan * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: 2 lead roles In notable series have her clearly meet WP:NACTOR. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I concur with Mushy Yank. At least two co-leading roles in the television series Sembaruthi and Mr. Manaivi. Fulfills NACTOR#1. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 16:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as the previous AFD was closed as Delete and it seems like many sources concern her personal life, not her career.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Colman (author)

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

No independent reliable sources found. Author thus fails WP:NBIO. GTrang (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, and England. GTrang (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
del No discussions of the person in RS. - Altenmann >talk 16:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Music in Dresden

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

This article cites no sources and contains almost no prose. It claims to be about "Music in Dresden", but it contains only three timelines of classical music composers who allegedly "spent a significant amount of time in the German city of Dresden". It makes no mention of any other kind of music that may have existed at any time in that city. I don't think there is any hope for a reliably sourced version of this article that is anything more than a list of trivia. If there is such a hope, this article is probably not useful as a base for creating it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, History, Lists, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:SELCRIT, there is no clear selection criteria (having spent "a significant amount of time in Dresden" seems quite arbitrary). Without any sources to support it, it is a case of WP:TNT. The list could be recreated if an editor wants to define precise verifiable criteria for inclusion. In this state, it should not stay on Wikipedia. Broc (talk) 12:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unreferenced, unclear how these people are relate to Dresden, there is no references that the subject "music in Dresden" was discussed in sources, i.e., the subject is of dubious encyclopedicity. - Altenmann >talk 16:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ara Najarian

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

Non-notable local official. His city council position doesn't satisfy NPOL and he doesn't seem to meet GNG otherwise. Of the 6 sources cited on the page: one is his page on a database of registered lawyers, one is the Ohio Birth Index, one is his resume, one is his campaign website, and one is his bio on the city of Glendale's official website; the only actual news article cited is a WP:ROTM article about an election he ran in. I can't really find anything better on Google. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Purely local coverage [30], [31], confirmation of election wins. Nothing beyond routine coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 01:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Law, Transportation, California, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and keep improving. Easily meets WP:BASIC and likely WP:GNG. (And a little worried that there has been insufficient WP:BEFORE, possibly because there is also a Los Angeles Times sports writer with the same name, so it generates a ton of irrelevant coverage if you don't use additional search parameters.) Najarian has been vocal about advocating Armenian-American issues – Glendale has one of the largest Armenian communities outside Armenia (and this Los Angeles Times article where he is quoted is just the tip of the iceberg) – and an initial 15-minute search yielded coverage of his meetings with the prime minister of Armenia, and he is also frequently covered in the Armenian-American community press extending beyond Glendale. It will take a long time to sort through all the coverage to identify the "best 3", but this is more a case of having to spend time to search, sort, assess and improve, rather than agonizing that this four-time mayor and councilmember of Glendale has been completely ignored by the media outside of Glendale.) Cielquiparle (talk) 06:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another one: "Najarian gets presidential welcome in Armenia" which appeared in both the Los Angeles Times and the Glendale News-Press. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Babydog

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

Article clearly does not meet WP:N. See also WP:BLP1E. Content should go into article on 2024 Republican Convention. Casprings (talk) 00:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The subject currently has media going back to 2022. WP:BLP1E doesn’t apply. Thriley (talk) 00:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Extensive coverage in RS for 2-3 yrs now, very much meeting GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 01:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Easily meets GNG. Here's a NY Times article about Justice and Babydog from last year:[32]. Thriley (talk) 01:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Oaktree. Queen of Hearts ^talk 01:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Politics, COVID-19, and West Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject is notable, as is clear from the media attention she has received. This is not based on a single event, as WP:BLP1E typically applies to biographies of living persons. It's crucial to note that Babydog is not a person, and sources have featured her over many years. Articles from the New York Times and other sources confirm this coverage. The subject is part of public discourse, meeting the standards outlined in GNG. This justifies keeping the article.--AstridMitch (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Definitely passes WP:GNG. Not to mention that BLP1E doesn't apply to non-humans, and she has coverage from multiple events from 2021 to 2024. It doesn't even make sense to merge into the 2024 RNC page like the nominator suggests, as this article only has two sentences about her appearance at the RNC. Di (they-them) (talk) 03:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As Mentioned above this dog is notable per the recent and previous domestic media coverage, but now is viral sensation on social media, and has international attention from News Outlets in, Australia, India and more. This article has already gone above and beyond with suitable sources from multiple places in print, TV and video, including previous articles well before the recent RNC event in 2024, such as the "Do it for Babydog" Vaccine Lottery in 2021. As stated above by others, I agree that it meets the basic criteria for general notability. RedatopiaM (talk) 08:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per others. Coverage is not limited to convention. JSwift49 10:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Jim Justice. Sure the dog is notable, but the content is all still closely related to Justice and can be covered in his article just fine. Reywas92^Talk 13:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Babydog's relevancy is greater than her appearance at the RNC, and ought not to be merged with Justice's article due to her involvement in state-wide schemes like "Do it for Babydog". She meets notability similar to other dogs of significant public interest.

Horizons 1 (talk) 19:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]