Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Netherlands

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Netherlands. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Netherlands|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Netherlands. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Europe.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Netherlands/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Wikipedia:Notice board for Dutch wikipedians

Scan for Netherlands related AfDs

Scan for Netherlands related Prods
Scan for Netherlands related TfDs

Netherlands

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 redirect‎ to All You Need Is Luv'. ✗plicit 13:15, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Stop Now (Ladies On Mars Remix)

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

No evidence found of notability, best source is this blog already included in the articlev, looking through Google and Google News revealed no reliable sources discussing the song. Should be redirected to All You Need Is Luv'. Fram (talk) 07:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated for the same reason (and same redirect target):

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Netherlands. Fram (talk) 07:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per lack of sources. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 06:30, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect both per nom, ATD, PRESERVE, and CHEAP. Not each song deserves an article. Sometimes just the artist. Otherwise neither. Thanks, Fram, for suggesting a fine ATD upfront! gidonb (talk) 17:51, 18 May 2025 (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.

Michael Bresser

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

Does not meet WP:BIO. Unable to find significant independent coverage, although his club (PSV) has some press releases; other than that, it's just database entries. — Moriwen (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Netherlands. — Moriwen (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Not sure why it wasn't sent to draft space in the first place. Could easily be notable in the future. Govvy (talk) 20:42, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's more than 90 days old and therefore ineligible, alas.— Moriwen (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Drafify - not currently notable, but might be in future. Giant Snowman 18:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep since presently notable. There is a huge distance between the intro and the facts on the ground. SIGCOV sources: ESPN article by Daan Sutorius and AD article by Rik Elfrink. These are multiple sources that support notability. Other items that fall short of standalone SIGCOV yet can cumulatively contribute to such (i.e. do not analyze individually!): [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Among these are additional articles by the sports journalist Rik Elfrink. gidonb (talk) 18:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we have a clear analysis of the sources added?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 21:59, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:07, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Moriwen, Govvy, Svartner, and GiantSnowman: Courtesy ping, please review the sources presented above. ✗plicit 00:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The ESPN article looks good, the other sources are either superficial or paywalled. I still think draftify is the best alternative for now. Svartner (talk) 05:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The AD source is great. I did look behind the paywall. gidonb (talk) 16:34, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. ESPN.nl is hardly an independent source, given their extensive contract and mixed finances with Eredivisie Media & Marketing and direct collaboration with the Eredivisie clubs. Eredivisie Media & Marketing CV was established by the Eredivisie clubs in 2008 to exploit their collective media and sponsorship rights. The company's first major achievement was the launch of the television channel Eredivisie Live, the first owned television channel by clubs in Europe. In 2012, FOX International Channels acquired a majority stake in EMM, and Eredivisie Live was renamed FOX Sports a year later. In 2019, The Walt Disney Company acquired the majority share. Since January 1, 2021, the television channel has been known as ESPN. With just the AD source I think it's reasonable to draftify until further coverage becomes available. JoelleJay (talk) 18:30, 29 May 2025 (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 redirect‎ to Pope Adrian VI#Papacy. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:44, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cardinals created by Adrian VI

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

Contested PROD. It’s a one-item list. The page creator removed the PROD on the grounds that there are articles for all creations of cardinals and that they contain more information, but a one-item list isn’t needed, and the information can be put on the page about the cardinal himself. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as nominator: as the only pages that link to this page are List of creations of cardinals and Pope Adrian VI, I think anyone following the link is looking for information on Willem van Enckevoirt, the cardinal in question, so a redirect there would be better. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 13:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 14:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 14:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:53, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment if there are articles for all creations of cardinals, then perhaps keep as a redirect for navigation and redirect to Pope Adrian VI. Jahaza (talk) 19:59, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Pope Adrian VI#Papacy. Duplicative and unnecessary, one item is not a list even if other items in the set have lists. Reywas92^Talk 20:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pope Adrian VI#Papacy as an ATD. A one person list is not necessary. Esolo5002 (talk) 21:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect is certainly the correct outcome here. Pope Adrian VI#Papacy looks like an adequate target. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:32, 20 May 2025 (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.

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 merge‎ to Kisei (Go). Good luck to anyone taking on this Merge project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:10, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20th Kisei

AfDs for this article:

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

Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. The page is a record of a tournament, rather than an encyclopedia page. The contest has run since 1977, but there have been no individual pages since 2008. I've put some through PROD, but some have been dePRODed in 2008, 2010 & 2013 (22, 24 & 25). This one (20th) went to AfD in 2007. I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

Blackballnz (talk) 09:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Games, and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blackballnz: per WP:BEFORE, what is your assessment of the Japanese sources on various Kisei editions? MarioGom (talk) 21:56, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. I don't read Japanese but would welcome the involvement of someone who does. Of the articles listed above, around half have no sources at all. The rest are sourced to links with similar tournament information, which could not be said to be independent. Many of these articles have no leads. When 20th Kisei went to AFD in 2007, editors said they would work to bring them up to standard. That as 18 years ago, and very little has changed. The articles above relate to the years 1977 - 2007. In recent years, there have been no articles, but all the winners are listed on Kisei (Go). Blackballnz (talk) 00:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the answer. So note for the closer and other participants: someone should assess the existing sources WP:BEFORE deciding here. MarioGom (talk) 09:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:50, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 12:06, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. 23rd Kisei was prodded and deleted earlier this year. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:43, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the pages into Kisei (Go) under new sections. Redirect afterwards. SeaDragon1 (talk) 14:50, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all as suggested by SeaDragon1. It would be great if we can also merge the deleted article! Can be done by undelete. Probably the hard working PROD review team missed something this once. gidonb (talk) 18:28, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: So far, there are arguments for a Merge but with such a large bundled deletion nomination, I'd like for there to be a firmer consensus. If there is a relevant WikiProject, maybe they could be notified especially if this does become a Merge closure, we could use their help.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:31, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan. MarioGom (talk) 21:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

.

Comment. As a Japanese speaker, I had a look at sources. I'm having a hard time finding reliable third-party coverage for the older kisei tournaments online, but I am finding a few news articles on the more recent ones (here's one for the 49th for example: https://www.asahi.com/articles/DA3S16178212.html). Even those are relatively rare though it seems. Erynamrod (talk) 19:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a non-speaker of Japanese, I could see that the 49th Kisei was recognized as such. If we indeed go for a merge, the editions do not need to be individually notable. Only Kisei. The merged content would strengthen the article! gidonb (talk) 21:53, 21 May 2025 (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.

Others

Requested Mergers

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Flag of Drenthe (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of Flevoland (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of Groningen (province) (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of The Hague (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of Weert (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Netherlands

Netherlands

Don't Stop Now (Ladies On Mars Remix)

Michael Bresser

Cardinals created by Adrian VI

20th Kisei

Others

Requested Mergers

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also