Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

15 May 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< May 14	May 16 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Opinion polling for the 46th Canadian federal election Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opinion polling for the 46th Canadian federal election

Terrorist tactics, techniques, and procedures

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

This is a procedural nomination on behalf of 35.139.154.158 (talk) who requested at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#AFD request - Terrorist tactics, techniques, and procedures that this article be nominated for deletion. The supplied rationale is:

WP:CFORK of Tactics of terrorism. Collection of this as a distinct topic seems to be due to a single author, C. Flaherty, which not so coincidentally is rather similar to the username of this article's creator and primary contributor.

I am not offering an opinion at this time beyond noting the creator was user:CFlaherty, who has not edited since 2021. Thryduulf (talk) 21:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This reminds me of a similar phenomenon for the Airport city and Aerotropolis articles (see comments on the Talk pages of those articles). See also WP:NEOLOGISM. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:30, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AN/MPN-14K Mobile Ground Approach System

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

The AN/MPN-14K is a modified AN/MPN-14 which is fully described in the article AN/MPN. There is a wikilink to the -14K article within the AN/MPN article which is wholly unnecessary since the -14K article does not meet general notability and the -14K article has no citations at all. I recommend the -14K article be deleted (merge unnecessary). — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹ (Tadg^Talk) 20:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Andrew Poole

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

Doesn’t seem to meet WP:SIGCOV. One of the sources is a press release, another is some random Flash presentation (which I have no idea if it is reliable or not), another is a 2 sentence mention in an article about a movie, and the HarperCollins profile seems to be a primary source that does not establish notability. (I’m pretty sure every author under that publishing company has a profile on there, and the author gets to write the blurb that goes on it.) Tried looking for other sources but the only other ones I could find were primary. ApexParagon (talk) 20:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Journalism. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rachmat Harsono

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

Refs are run of the mill puff pieces, PR and business news. No indication of signifiance. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 20:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Koichi Sasada

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

This article about a programmer and academic has been tagged with notability concerns since 2014. I have carried out WP:BEFORE and added three external links, but these don't help with notability (two interviews and a blog post with a translation of work by Sasada). I may be missing sources in Japanese, but with what I have found I don't think he meets WP:NACADEMIC, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Redirect to Heroku is a possibility. Tacyarg (talk) 18:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Technology, Computing, Japan, and California. Tacyarg (talk) 18:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete fails WP:NPROF and I dont see enough in-depth coverage to justify notability as a Ruby developer per WP:GNG. --hroest 20:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blanco, Tulare County, California

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

Fails WP:NPLACE, I did a WP:BEFORE search, and did not find significant coverage, or any mentions of a Blanco in Tulare County. From above, this area seems to be only be a farm. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 18:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and California. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 18:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete Older topos show this was the site of a passing siding on the Santa Fe line. Before the dairy complex was built around 2000, there was just nothing here. Mangoe (talk) 18:36, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Le Chi Thuc

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

Unsourced article. It seems like I'm reading a self promotion article. I did a quick WP:BEFORE but can't find anything about this person.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United States, Vietnam, and Politics.
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I added a few sources, though I'm definitely leaning delete. I wouldn't really consider either of them SIGCOV, just a few mentions to prove he is what it says he is, but they're both by the same author and I can't find much else on him. Ré union! 18:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Sirah of the Prophet

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

I can't find evidence that this is a notable book, sources are blogs, shops, ... Nothing better seems to available through Google Books or News. Fram (talk) 16:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Islam. Fram (talk) 16:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 16:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ravindra Kumar (mountaineer)

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

Fails WP:NBIO, created using WP:LLM with only one source that is PRIMARY (self-published). All others are mostly WP:TIMESOFINDIA that has no url/links. Agent 007 (talk) 16:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Bihar. Agent 007 (talk) 16:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Beyond the fact that this seems pretty likely AI-written, it is also created by a blocked user, and it is an orphan. Ré union! 18:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable IAS officer. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 19:08, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assyrian–Kurdish conflict

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

This article is a wp:nor mess. Some of its content is lifted from articles that I wrote, but I have seen no evidence that the article topic exists. It makes about as much sense as an article about the "Asian - African conflict" throughout North America from 1700 to present. For most of history there have been more conflicts between different Assyrians and Kurds and it still doesn't make sense to consider either of them a cohesive group that is involved in an armed conflict. (t · c) buidhe 16:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vwakpor Efuetanu

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

Spammy bio for a non-notable Nigerian businessperson. The sources are promotional fluff (a visionary leader using technology and sustainable energy solutions to uplift underserved African communities... setting a precedent for innovation and progress across the continent is par for the course [1], [2]). Other sources are just WP:PRIMARYSOURCES based on the subject's own words about himself ([3], [4], [5]); regurgiated press releases ([6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13]); straight-up sponsored content ([14]); tabloid coverage ([15]); or his own website ([16]). His supposed "honorary doctorate" is from an institution that does not appear to grant degrees at all and should not be considered a significant award for purposes of WP:ANYBIO#1. All told, I don't see a WP:GNG or WP:NBIO pass here. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per above

DankPedia (talk) 18:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: While I understand the concerns raised, there are several points worth clarifying:

1. Notability (WP:GNG/WP:NBIO): Vwakpor Efuetanu has received substantial coverage in numerous independent, reliable sources across Nigeria’s top-tier media. Outlets such as Tribune Online, Leadership, The Nation, The Guardian Nigeria, and Vanguard have all published extended profiles or interviews. These publications are not merely blogs or PR reposts; many are mainstream national outlets with editorial oversight.

2. Depth of Coverage: The articles in Tribune and Leadership go beyond passing mentions. For example, this piece discusses Efuetanu’s partnerships with HP, Beats by Dre, and Nexford University, and his AI empowerment efforts in Edo State. These are not trivial activities, and they have received regional and national recognition.

3. Independence of Sources: While some sources may contain promotional language (as is common in coverage of entrepreneurs), this does not invalidate the independence of coverage. Many pieces were written by journalists, not submitted press releases, and they include third-party analysis of impact and reach.

4. Significance of Achievements: The subject’s work in AI education, youth empowerment (over 30,000 trained individuals), and partnerships with state governments (e.g., Edo State Government) show a demonstrable impact in a sector (AI and renewable energy) that is recognized as both emerging and of global relevance. These accomplishments are covered in national outlets, indicating the individual’s notability under WP:NBIO #2 (significant coverage of professional impact).

5. Honorary Degree – While the awarding institution (CIPRMP Ghana) may not be globally ranked, it is commonly cited in Nigerian media, and such honorary recognitions are frequently mentioned in bios of other notable figures. That alone is not the basis for notability, but it is part of the broader picture of public recognition.

6. Primary Sources / Website: The subject’s website is used only as a supplementary source for factual background and not as evidence of notability. The article itself can and should rely primarily on independent secondary sources, which are available and already cited.

I welcome efforts to further improve the article’s neutrality and tone, and agree that removing any promotional language or overly close paraphrasing is essential. However, deletion is not necessary. The subject clearly passes WP:GNG and likely WP:NBIO based on multiple independent, reliable sources with significant coverage.

Covnantay (talk) 18:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this reply is CLEARLY written with WP:LLM. Ré union! 18:29, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Dclemens1971. Ré union! 18:29, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daris Đezić

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

Does not meet WP:BIO. Second-tier footballer with only database entries cited. WP:BEFORE turns up nothing better than his name mentioned in lists of players; no in-depth coverage anywhere. — Moriwen (talk) 15:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. — Moriwen (talk) 15:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 16:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Thiel

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

The only source for this football player is a bio from his club. I was unable to find any independent sources, including on the wikipedia library. It's possible there's something older and non-digitized that I'm missing, but I've had no luck at all. — Moriwen (talk) 15:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Australia. — Moriwen (talk) 15:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The article is about an Australian rules footballer. Svartner (talk) 15:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've found 1 article on Newsbank, but Australian online coverage from the 1980s is extremely poor, and even recent Adelaide papers are behind paywalls. Absolutely guaranteed that there is a heap of coverage offline of a ten year player, twice winning the premiership, and dying young. The-Pope (talk) 16:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Bianchini

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

I cannot find any evidence that this individual passes any of the criteria of WP:NARTIST, WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NACADEMIC, or WP:GNG. (If you find anything indicating otherwise, please ping me.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Artists, and France. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per above

DankPedia (talk) 18:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dee Brestin

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

Fails WP:BIO. Disputed draftification. WP:DRAFTOBJECT prohibits unilateral return top Draft. WP:ROTM author. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 15:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Women, Christianity, and United States of America. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 15:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Illinois, Missouri, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Neiszner

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

Article about a hockey player, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for hockey players. The leagues he played in, the American Hockey League and the ECHL, are specifically listed in WP:NHOCKEY as conferring notability only if the player "Achieved preeminent honors (all-time top-10 career scorer, first-team all-star)" -- but there's no claim being made here that he ever achieved any such thing in either league, and he hasn't been shown to pass WP:GNG either as the article is referenced entirely to content self-published by the teams he has played or worked for rather than any evidence of independent coverage in third-party media sources.
The article has, additionally, spent 18 full months with WP:BLP-violating nonsense like "He is currently an ambulance driver in Alberta. He once smiled, but really didn't like it. Chris also had the pleasure of providing the Rebels staff with water in their mouths." in it until I found and poleaxed it just now, which isn't a deletion rationale in and of itself but does speak to how many responsible editors have actually seen the article.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable without much more and better sourcing for it than this. Bearcat (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:36, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:36, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:37, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Whenever I see an AfD on a article on an obscure hockey player such as this, I tend to flicker my gaze to the top of the screen to see if Dolovis -- an editor eventually community-banned from new article creation, and responsible for creating thousands of articles on NN subjects, often in direct defiance of notability guidelines -- was the perp. Bingo! In any event, there's never been any iteration of NHOCKEY under which this player, whose career was multiple rungs below top flight, has been considered presumptively notable. Ravenswing 12:30, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Red Deer Advocate gave extensive SIGCOV of him, e.g. 1 2 3 4 5 6. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:03, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Versions of the above links that will open through Wikipedia Library: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- Also this story from the Las Vegas Review-Journal. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:28, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are four significant article about him provided above. 1 4 5 6. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 12:27, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Local coverage in the home market of the team he played for isn't sufficient in and of itself to give a minor-league hockey player a GNG-based exemption from WP:NHOCKEY. We'd have to see nationalizing coverage, not just the Red Deer Advocate alone. Bearcat (talk) 15:20, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

coverage isn't sufficient ... [for a] GNG-based exemption from WP:NHOCKEY – ?? NHOCKEY is an inclusionary criterion, not an exlusionary one (and a broken one at that -- if you meet NHOCKEY, you may be notable if you pass GNG; if you do not meet NHOCKEY, you may be notable if you pass GNG). The only thing that matters is whether he meets GNG, and national coverage is not necessary for that. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:25, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's no such thing as a distinction between "inclusionary" and "exclusionary" SNGs. GNG does not just count up the number of media hits and keep anybody who's surpassed an arbitrary number, without considering the context in which the media hits exist — as I've said more than once, if GNG just concerned itself with the number of sources a person had, and didn't care about whether the context of what the person was getting covered for was actually of any broad or sustained public interest or not, then we would have to keep an article about my mother's former neighbour who once got a blip of media coverage for finding a pig in her front yard. (Hell, if all GNG cared about was the number of media hits that could be found, and didn't measure for whether the context of what those hits existed for passed any notability criteria or not, then I would even be able to claim that I qualified for an article.) So media coverage doesn't just have to hit some arbitrary number of clippings, and also has to verify passage of one or more notability criteria. Bearcat (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sport-specific sub criteria is just leftover stuff from before WP:NSPORTS2022 that wasn't participation based (all of the participation criteria was removed). None of the individual sport guidelines have been updated with replacement criteria so we're pretty much just left with skeletonized guidelines that offer unhelpful advice like likely to be notable if they've been inducted into the hall of fame. There's isn't even any guidance currently on football, gridiron football, or baseball. In regards to NHOCKEY, the only NHL guidance mentions first-round draft picks, which is obviously too strict given all of the blue links at 2017 NHL entry draft (and there's never been an overabundance of hockey players anyway). ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Right now, it looks like Wayne Gretzky fails NHOCKEY. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:24, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He does fail NHOCKEY. I suggest an AfD. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SIGCOV does not exclude local coverage, and makes no mention of national coverage. Flibirigit (talk) 15:57, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Local coverage isn't excluded from usability, and I never said it was. But local coverage is not necessarily enough to hand a person a GNG-based exemption from normal inclusion criteria all by itself — unelected candidates are not exempted from NPOL just because they can show a handful of local campaign coverage in the local media of the area where they were running without any evidence of broader significance, actors who don't otherwise pass NACTOR's achievement-based criteria are not exempted from them just because they can show a handful of "local aspiring actor gets first bit part in movie" coverage in their hometown media without any evidence of broader significance, high school and junior league athletes are not exempted from the inclusion criteria for their sport just because they can show a handful of hometown local coverage without any evidence of broader significance, local bands are not exempted from having to pass WP:NMUSIC just because they got a few hits of "local band plays local pub" in their local newspaper without any evidence of broader significance, and on and so forth.
If a person is properly established as passing an SNG on an actual inclusion criterion, then we genuinely don't care whether their sourcing is "local" or "national" — but if a person's coverage isn't establishing passage of any specific inclusion criteria, and instead you're trying to argue that they get over GNG purely on the number of media hits that exist in and of itself, then a local vs. national coverage test does come into play, because lots of people can show some evidence of local coverage in contexts that don't pass encyclopedic standards of permanent international significance. Bearcat (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLUDGEON and WP:WALLOFTEXT may apply here. Flibirigit (talk) 21:01, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the only coverage were a couple of articles from Neiszer's home town of Craik, Saskatchewan stating that he made it to a WHL team, I'd probably agree that he does not meet GNG. But he has much more extensive coverage from Red Deer, Alberta, which is not his home town (or even his home province) plus significant coverage from Las Vegas, Nevada, which is not even his home country. That's not to mention a lot of insignificant coverage in other newspapers in other ciites. So he actually has not only national coverage, but international coverage. Rlendog (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Red Deer Advocate is a perfectly acceptable source for demonstrating significant coverage for notability, which has no "national coverage" requirement, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal provides an additional source of significant coverage. Rlendog (talk) 17:18, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment while not really an international outlet, there are at least 6 articles from the Red Deer Advocate here which would count towards notability. However, my problem is that they do not seem to be very in-depth which makes me wonder whether there is enough material to write an interesting article that goes beyond the Hockey stats. --hroest 19:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sources seem quite limited and I don't think it passes WP:BASIC. Ramos1990 (talk) 23:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG with multiple sources of SIGCOV listed above. NSPORT doesn't have any reasonable sport-specific guidance on stuff anymore since WP:NSPORTS2022 so this is all we have to go on. Just following the rules. Can't have it both ways. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 00:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer This is due for close or relist today, but I don't see any source review. Could we get a relist to do that properly. My first observation is that 6 of the 7 sources come from the same newspaper, and so these would only count as a single source for purposes of GNG. The links have ot been set up through the Wikipedia library so I will need to do a bit of work to review them, but that is at most one source. The other, the Las Vegas Review, is a report on their return, but is primarily an interview, so the biographical information is not independent, and is primary. I think this needs more work. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 06:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 09:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Source review - Thanks for the relist. I have now looked at the six sources above, and here is my assessment (in conjunction with my earlier comment about the Las Vegas Review source).
The following are all from the Red Deer Advocate, a local paper for Red Deer, Alberta, Canada. They are mostly from one staff correspondent. One is from an alternate staff correspondent. The page subject is only associated with the Red Deer Rebels. The Red Deer Advocate is owned by Black Press, but coverage of a player on the local team in a local paper is clearly WP:ROUTINE or of questionable independence. To be notable, the player must surely be noticeable beyond the local paper.

1 (Meacham, 2001) Looks like SIGCOV, and secondary. As above, questionable independence. ?
2 - Not SIGCOV. N
3 (Meacham, 2005) Looks like SIGCOV, and secondary. As above, questionable independence. Additionally information appears to be obtained via interview, and aspects of this are primary reporting. ?
4 (Meacham, 2010) Looks like SIGCOV, and secondary. As above, questionable independence. ?
5 (Rode, 2005) This appears to be a write up of an interview, so the biographical information is not independent. N
6 (Meacham, 2003) Looks like SIGCOV, and secondary. As above, questionable independence. ?

The six sources count together. While some are excluded, there is SIGCOV here in this local paper about the local team. But can they be used for notability? Certainly not on their own. They provide some useable biographical information, but they do not indicate notability. GNG requires multiple sources in any case. If we had national coverage at this level, we would keep, based on the coverage, but as things stand, if this is all we have, we are not yet at GNG. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in our guidelines suggests that coverage by a "local team in a local newspaper" is of "questionable independence" or necessarily routine. And the Las Vegas article (which is not an interview) is not Red Deer, or even Alberta, or even Canada. So there are multiple sources, and not just national coverage but international coverage. Rlendog (talk) 13:23, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Very much disagree with the source review above. The Review-Journal is an ~800 word story on him that is not solely an interview. Sirfurboy seems to be stating that any story that has any quotes or such is automatically non-independent, but that is clearly incorrect and including quotes from closely related people is a feature of almost all good sports reporting. Review-Journal is SIGCOV source 1. Then we've got an avalanche of coverage from the Advocate. "Questionable independence"? No, the paper is not owned by the team or anything like that. Being local does not mean non-independent! And there is no requirement that a subject receives national coverage. The Review-Journal has SIGCOV and then the Advocate has SIGCOV. That's multiple sources with SIGCOV, and that meets GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nearly everything in the Review is indeed from an interview. I missed that 89 words of direct quotation actually come from Glen Gulutzan, his coach, saying:
Early on he's had some offensive success, but what we can count on him for is the same game every night. That's why he's good for our younger guys. His game doesn't fluctuate every day. It's the same every day.
"He kills penalties, plays in front of the net on the power play and on 5-on-5 he's defensively responsible. We know every night we can rely on him in tough situations. He's just a well-rounded player, and that's how he has to be to get to the next level.
Other than that, the only material that is not directly from the subject is that he spent last season in France (signed because of his agent), his offense has improved, he scored 23 points in 26 games, and he is reunited with Justin Taylor. This is primarily an interview with a returning player. Where is he returning to? Las Vegas. And this is the Las Vegas Review. What is not interview is news reporting, city wide but local. Again, if we had any national coverage it would be different, but coverage of who is rejoining a local team is routine, match reporting is primary and interview content is not independent. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's 260 words of coverage of Neiszner that is not from quotes – that's SIGCOV. There is no requirement that the coverage be non-local. Whether you personally judge it to be "routine" because its of a "returning player" is irrelevant. The only thing that matters, aside from it being reliable and independent (which it is), is whether it is in-depth coverage (SIGCOV), which it is. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If we're discounting "local" coverage and entire sources because they have some quote material (which is standard sports journalism), then there are a decent amount of NHL players that wouldn't even pass GNG. Would an article on a Philadelphia Flyers player in The Philadelphia Inquirer not count since it's "local"? Only All-Star caliber players and those who have played for 10+ years will have national SIGCOV. I'm not going to "die on the hill" (for lack of a better phrase) for this minor leaguer but I would for an NHL player. Here is an example of a Q&A type interview that wouldn't count towards notability. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes can be valid coverage, especially if they are not from an interview with the subject. Rlendog (talk) 13:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The general rule is that any statements made by interviewees about themselves, their activities, or anything they are connected to is considered to have come from a primary source. - see WP:IV. As we want biographical SIGCOV of the player, the quoted information is primary, and cannot be used for SIGCOV. What we can take into account is the question of why the interview happened. Why did a newspaper believe interviewing this subject was important? Does that indicate notability? But that takes us to the occasioning of the sources, and relevant here is that these are coverage of the local team, and this is run of the mill stuff. Look at the 89 words from the coach above: it's just talking about him as a team member. We need something more here. If the subject is notable, someone other than the local paper will have taken note in something other than simple team news reporting. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The general rule is that any statements made by interviewees about themselves, their activities, or anything they are connected to is considered to have come from a primary source. – correct, which means that the quotes in the article cannot count as coverage of the subject. However, the ~260 words written by the journalist on Neiszner is coverage that counts as SIGCOV. All good sports journalism includes quotes, so you're suggestions that including quotes automatically makes sources primary and unusable would make basically all sports SIGCOV unusable, which is very obviously in error and a ridiculous assertion that I have never before come across in my five years of participation at hundreds of sports AFDs. Once again, whether you personally think this is "local run of the mill stuff" is entirely irrelevant; all that matters is whether there is SIGCOV in reliable sources, which we have here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I make it 171 words and I already dealt with that above. It tells us that he spent last season in France (signed because of his agent), his offense has improved, he scored 23 points in 26 games, and he is reunited with Justin Taylor. The source is primarily an interview in local press about a returning player. It is routine, and the occasion of the source (that he is a returning player) makes that information primary. Biographical information may be secondary, but there is no independent biographical information to speak of. It is almost entirely not independent. And we routinely treat routine local press more cautiously for notability. You are attempting to make this a black and white, any two sources and it's in. That's not what the policy says. What it actually says is this:
"Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.
Under the accompanying note it adds "Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic." If we had one national source, I'd accept these take us to multiple sources, but they are simply not enough on their own. Thus, at this stage, my !vote is Delete. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:35, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure how you get 171, but it is ~260. Per GNG, a topic is notable when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. It says nothing of "routine local press" being discounted. And I'll add that the Las Vegas Review-Journal is no small-town paper, but a large one, the largest in the state of Nevada. That the source is about a "returning player" is irrelevant; once again, the only thing that matters is if there's SIGCOV. It is not primary, and that there's some quotes in the article does not make it so, for quotes are a feature of all sports journalism. The suggestion that quotes automatically make a source unusable is ridiculous and would result in the deletion of the vast majority of all sports articles. National coverage is not required... BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:53, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And let's not forget that IV is an essay, not a policy or guideline. Rlendog (talk) 13:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But not wrong. The policy it is based on is found in WP:PRIMARY. See note d. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But the relevant issue of whether quotes within a secondary source count as primary is not in WP:PRIMARY. Rlendog (talk) 12:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This looks like wikilawyering around the margins. Look, if you are writing a biography, everything the subject of the biography says about themself is a primary source and not independent of the subject, by definition. That is not just Wikipedia saying so. This is true everywhere, and should be self evident. It is also the policy (as I have shown) and the guidance (as I have shown). What you can seek to do with interviews is demonstrate that the fact of the interview makes a case for notability. That is, the occasion of an interview should be considered. It is not a mechanistic thing, but clearly if someone is being interviewed by a variety of different news outlets, there will be a reason why they are being interviewed. I've argued, in the past, that a subject was likely to be notable based on the range and duration of interview material. But that argument is quite apart from the GNG one. For GNG, interviews are neither independent nor secondary. There is no wiggle room there. They are not. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:22, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: it's not per definition that interview material is primary; see Wikipedia:Interviews#Primary or secondary?. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which says The general rule is that any statements made by interviewees about themselves, their activities, or anything they are connected to is considered to have come from a primary source. I already quoted it. What an interviewee says about themself is primary. Please note that this is exactly what I said. We are not talking about an interviewee talking about the right way to varnish yachts for our yacht varnishing page. We are talking about interviewees who are talking about themselves, for the question of what to put in their biographical articles, as I made very clear. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:32, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I made the note as your general advice What you can seek to do with interviews is demonstrate that the fact of the interview makes a case for notability. can be read as the content of an interview is always primary. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 19:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None of that changes the fact that the article written by an independent journalist who decided to include the quote (or used information from an interview in their article) is secondary. None of what you have "shown" changes that. And the statement that you quoted is solely in the essay WP:IV, not in any of our guidance or policy. Rlendog (talk) 18:08, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And your claim that "everything the subject of the biography says about themself is a primary source and not independent of the subject, by definition." But some of the quotes you want to exclude from the Las Vegas article are from the subject's coach, not from the subject. But in any case, the journalist who chose to include those quotes in their article is not the subject and not even related to the subject so it should be self-evident that the article is secondary, even if WP:IV was a guideline or policy.Rlendog (talk) 18:15, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is just repeating what has been discussed above. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As SIGCOV of the subject is provided. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 07:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here is an article from the Las Vegas Sun about Neiszner. Not the most enlightening, and it does contain some quotes from the subject, but another independent, reliable source that felt this subject was worthy of an article. Rlendog (talk) 18:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd closed as keep, but have volunteered to relist per User_talk:Star_Mississippi#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chris_Neiszner May weigh in more later when I'm back online.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umar Faruk Abdumajid

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

Couldn't find any WP:SIGCOV. Only seems to appear as a passing mention in the sources in the article and other very similar sources. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Nigeria. SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Round Rock Christian Academy

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

I nominated this article for PROD a week ago, but didn't realize that it was already nominated for PROD and contested in the past therefore being ineligible for another PROD nomination (whew, i'll be more careful next time). I don't think that the school is notable enough to warrant a standalone article. As far as I can see, there does not seem to be a suitable article to redirect to, so AfD is the only course of action available. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Christianity, United States of America, and Texas. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
redirect and merge into Round_Rock,_Texas#Education whatever can be salvaged on history (probably not more than half a paragraph) that is not ROTM "school teaches stuff". --hroest 20:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Warren James Jewellers

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

Should be deleted because it lacks independent, reliable sources to establish notability as required by Wikipedia guidelines. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:56, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nothing found in support of retaining this article here. Ran a WP:BEFORE but hope of finding WP:SIGCOV effectively truncated by the abysmal search result. Patre23 (talk) 13:19, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

!vote From an initial review, there appears to be a lack of secondary sources. However, the company is - in my view - notable. It is described in 2006 as "the United Kingdom's largest independent jeweller" in a Nominet ruling. It is described as a national jewellery retailer in a more recent 2023 legal judgment. It's last statutory accounts show a revenue of over £100m per year. I will attempt to complete a more thorough review of secondary sources to support notability. Salicia7 (talk) 13:59, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 06:35, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I added the Nominet ruling as a citation, but struggled to find further secondary sources. However, in my view there is adequate references for a stub of this lenght. Salicia7 (talk) 15:33, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rangamati Government High School

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

Upon search, I don't think that the school is notable enough to warrant a standalone article. As far as my search, I don't see any reliable, secondary coverage, and the current state of the article also primarily cites their own website. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Usually Bangladeshi education institutions in the Chittagong Hill Tracts does not have secondary coverage. Education institute outside Dhaka are usually area-wise popular. Like this one is a well-known in Rangamati. Additionally, this is the first & oldest school in CHT. Notable alumnis also studied here. WinKyaw (talk) 15:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It seems to be one of the 64 government high schools located in the 64 districts of Bangladesh. The locals reckon that these schools are quite the talk of the region within their respective districts. Somajyoti ✉ 16:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete there is no indication of passing WP:NSCHOOL, there are no secondary sources that I could find in books that go beyond trivial coverage. There are some sources on a formar headmaster but mentions the school in one line. The arguments of User talk:Somajyoti and User:Win Kyaw boil down to WP:SOURCESMAYEXIST which is not sufficient. Similarly the fact that notable alumni have studied here does not make the school notable by itself. @User talk:Somajyoti and @User:Win Kyaw, please see this RFC which was discussed in great length and concludes that High schools are not inherently noteable and that reliable independent WP:SIGCOV needs to exist for them as well, which I dont see here. There simply isnt any coverage that we could use to write an article. --hroest 20:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Mapandan local elections

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

No cited sources cover the election at much length, and was not able to find much through searching. Election for small municipality of under 40,000, and relies on social media sources Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 02:24, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and Philippines. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:02, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the page author has placed a comment on this discussion talk page Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all,

I would like to kindly request that the deletion discussion regarding my article be closed. Since the nomination, I have been able to gather and incorporate additional, verifiable information and reliable sources that I believe significantly improve the article’s notability and overall quality.

I understand and appreciate the community’s concerns raised earlier. However, with the newly added sources and updates, I believe the article now better meets Wikipedia's inclusion standards. I am fully open to further suggestions for improvement and am committed to adhering to Wikipedia’s content and sourcing guidelines moving forward.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best regards, IJeskanEditorV1 IJeskanEditorV1 (talk) 07:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allin Kempthorne

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

I've AFD'd this, but actually I think it should be redirected to Wriggler (video game). There doesn't appear to be any independent, reliable sources giving significant coverage to the subject of this article. Sourcing is all tabloid news (The Mirror, The Sun, Metro) or passing mentions. Simply appearing on BGT (and not being recognised...) does not indicate notability. Simply being a bit-part actor in numerous films does not indicate notability. Additionally I have WP:PROMO/WP:COI concerns here.

They wrote the ZX Spectrum game Wriggler together with their twin when they were at school, and this game is clearly notable, but nothing else they have done appears to be notable.

Also nominating The Vampires of Bloody Island for deletion (no need to redirect this), which is the film Allin Kempthorne created. The only coverage that could be found for this is blatantly promotional ("we were forced to bring forward the release of this film because of an email campaign that no-one but us is the source for existing") and from sources of dubious reliability. Simply being nominated for a Twitter Shorty Award does not indicate notability.

Similarly also Learning Hebrew for the same reasons.FOARP (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Businesspeople, and Video games. FOARP (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Magic, Television, Entertainment, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Narinder Batth

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

His work might seem notable, but the lack of coverage in reliable sources indicates that he is not notable Afstromen (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Music, Asia, India, and Punjab. Afstromen (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment; did you look for punjabi language sources? AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I searched on Google in Punjabi, but the results did not satisfy the notability criteria.

Afstromen (talk) 04:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:46, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mokamtala Secondary School

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

No reliable, secondary coverage about the school beyond the fact that it exists. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom Somajyoti ✉ 16:36, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and merge into Jhikargacha_Upazila#Education. --hroest 20:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Scott Robinson

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

Violates WP:BLP1E. Should be redirected to List of longest prison sentences. ––FormalDude (talk) 08:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, and Oklahoma. Shellwood (talk) 09:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would very strongly oppose redirecting it there, that is not the kind of list we should be redirecting BLPs.

If there is better sourcing getting the longest prison sentence of all time is notable enough that it IMO invalidates the second prong of BLP1E. So then WP:NCRIMINAL is also a consideration. The sourcing I can find is not great so honestly he probably just fails the WP:GNG. But he does have an extremely generic name so I may be missing stuff. But unless there is more sourcing I failed to find, delete (Not redirect). PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect or smerge is as appropriate as the sentence. Bearian (talk) 08:50, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 14:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Toxic encephalopathy

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

Very few WP:MEDRS, much of it is uncited, and the NINDS article (https://web.archive.org/web/20050720074428/http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/encephalopathy/encephalopathy.htm) that makes up a lot of the cited material in the article is actually not specific to toxic encephalopathy. I was going to remove all of the material that's cited to NINDS because it may not be accurate to toxic encephalopathy, but at that point it would be leaving the article as mostly uncited or cited to unreliable sources. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 01:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 01:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Panchagarh railway station

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

No indication of signifance. Every reference is the same identical announcement of name change back to the original name plus some route information. Fails WP:NCORP WP:GNG. scope_creep^Talk 14:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 15:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. Jumpytoo Talk 16:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bravelets

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

Subject does not appear to be notable upon search. Although they have a considerably large social media following, it does not contribute to notability. No secondary coverage found that would satisfy WP:NORG or WP:GNG. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, United States of America, and Texas. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It appears a decent amount of the coverage that was there in 2016 - including some of the sources I used in the article itself - have disappeared in the last decade. It's a shame I can't see the Austin.com article anymore. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 01:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the jewelry company may be notable, I will try to search for additional sources.--Amlikdi (talk) 07:12, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Kocho killings

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

Cited entirely to breaking news. I searched, could find no sources that help notability. Does not pass WP:NEVENT. Probably could be merged somewhere. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Iraq. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment; did you look for any arabic or kurdish language sources? AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 02:25, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I looked for some variation of Kocho in Arabic plus the date and found nothing that seemed to be about this past the first month. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Support per nom. R3YBOl (talk) 22:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment; From my viewing of the sources, I believe they are news and not extended articles. The article still does not meet the standards in my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.113.115.249 (talk) 00:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chao Khamrop Road

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

Does not meet WP:NROAD or WP:GNG. JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 04:03, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Thailand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per JackFromWisconsin, both of their points are points where this article fail. Madeline1805 (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, perhaps to Pom Prap, the subdistrict the street is located in. There is in-depth coverage such as the cited Art & Culture article[17] and this short TV documentary[18], but there's only so much that could be said about this minor street, it'd be better off as a mention in a broader article about the wider neighbourhood. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on merging?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akunna

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

Fails WP:GNG. Not seeing significant coverage in sources on an internet search. Might also be considered a DAB page with only one article matching the name. JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 05:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

redirect. sourced from anonymous website. Weirdly, the website defines it as as female given name, but the only entry is a man :-) (I know, there is a Boy Named Sue, so why not be a boy named Akunna; I am just picking on the quality of sourcing). --Altenmann >talk 05:59, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Altenmann @JackFromWisconsin The name Akunna is actually commonly regarded to be unisex, and is predominant in the southeastern region of Nigeria. Verifiable sources are here, here, here and here. King ChristLike (talk) 06:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, none of these sources is acceptable for wikipedia. --Altenmann >talk 06:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:30, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024 PATAFA Weekly Relay Series – Men's 5 kilometres walk

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

I see no independent WP:SIGCOV for this athletic event and don't really see a strong redirect target either. The only independent coverage I could find was three paragraphs in this article, and that's not enough for WP:GNG/WP:NSPORT. Please ping me if significant coverage is found. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sport of athletics and Philippines. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James A. D. W. Anderson

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/James A. D. W. Anderson (3rd nomination)

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

Mathematical crackpot with no meaningful impact on the field per WP:ACADEMIC, and no coverage in popular press since initial 2006 spotlight. Academic discourse on "transreal arithmetic" is mostly WP:SELFPUB, barring a couple of papers published in non-mathematical journals. Fishsicles (talk) 11:58, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 12:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Yes, he does appear to be a crackpot. That might not be sufficient reason for deletion if he had a significant influence on mathematics, but as far as I can see he doesn't. Athel cb (talk) 12:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Compared to other fields, mathematics is much more tolerant of what would normally be labelled "crackpots" - rejecting an established axiom or theory usually means building a contrasting theory, which can be mathematically interesting in its own right. (WP:CRACKPOT's term for this would be "alternative theoretical formulation".) That said, "transreal arithmetic" has absolutely not developed into a theory of any interest to mathematicians, which means I'm more than comfortable applying the label.

I think a particularly useful point of contrast is inter-universal Teichmüller theory, which also makes dramatic claims that are (in the opinion of many number theorists) not properly substantiated, but remains of significant academic interest for its potential applications. "Transreal arithmetic" has attracted no such attention, and the only one to claim applications is Anderson himself. Fishsicles (talk) 14:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is indeed the third nomination of this article, but it is the first under this exact title: the article was first sent to AfD in 2006 with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Anderson (mathematician) (which closed with no consensus), and the second nomination in 2008 was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Anderson (computer scientist) (which closed as keep). (While James Anderson (mathematician) ended up getting deleted in 2006, that was at RfD after the article was renamed shortly after the first AfD.) No opinion on the current nomination. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:37, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering, Mathematics, Computing, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not worth a page and it is more about Transreal arithmetic than anything else. It is a transreal page, in a sense. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 19:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: My concern is more basic than the issues raised above: there are whole paragraphs in a BLP that are unsourced. I'd be willing to cut down the article to a stub, but that would disrupt the discussion. Not sure how to proceed. Bearian (talk) 00:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete "Anderson has been trying to market his ideas for transreal arithmetic and "Perspex machines" to investors. He claims that his work can produce computers which run "orders of magnitude faster than today's computers".[7][12] He has also claimed that it can help solve such problems as quantum gravity,[7] the mind-body connection,[13] consciousness[13] and free will.[13]" So, first of all, yes, that could be straight out of Underwood Dudley's book. Second, Anderson made one tiny news/blogosphere splash nearly two decades ago, and there's nothing else to go on. This merits maybe two lines in whatever article talks about mathematical crankery, not a whole biography. 64.112.179.236 (talk) 20:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kiki Shepard

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

I doubt the article meets the standards for notability. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 13:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 13:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Texas. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 13:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very much a WP:HEY candidate; being a co-host of a major syndicated show for fifteen years easily clinches WP:N and sourcing to get her over GNG should be very easy. Nathannah • 📮 19:03, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't find much coverage, this reads like a rewritten press release with no real author [19]. Gnewspapers brings up a similarly named individual on Broadway in the 1970s, I'm unsure if it's the same person. Oaktree b (talk) 21:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There has to be newspaper or textbook sources, I'm just in disbelief there's limited sources. – The Grid (talk) 15:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hope for Hong Kong

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

Page for a defunct centrist faction of the Hong Kong Liberal party. Four citations all to local news that stops with the collapse of this group. Considering they were a minor faction that never really accomplished anything and then folded its unlikely there will be more coverage in the future which means four local newspaper articles is likely what we've got. Lacking WP:SIGCOV I'd say delete it. Simonm223 (talk) 13:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Hong Kong. Shellwood (talk) 14:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think it is clear that the party did fulfil GNG/NORG with those sources and this AFD seems to focus more on whether it deserves a standalone article. The article currently includes four sources from the Hong Kong Economic Times and HK01, both of which are credible media outlets and generally reliable sources on zhwiki (see WP:HKRS#HKET and WP:HKRS#HK01), rather than some small-scale local tabloids. The coverage in this HKET article[20] and this HK01 article[21] appear to be adequately significant to me. The corresponding article on zhwiki also includes a few sources from Initium Media and Citizen News, and I found more news coverage during the party's operational period, such as a Ming Pao article about legal scholar Jack Lee [zh] announcing his decision to join the party.[22] There are also some commentaries on this party, like an Initium Media article thoroughly analyzing whether this party's centrist stance has any chance of survival in Hong Kong,[23] as well as opinion pieces from Ta Kung Pao and Orange News discussing potential reasons for founder James Tien to establish the party and his future political agenda.[24][25] I personally do not believe being defunct or a party's achievements are relevant to notability, especially since the founding members are all notable politicians (James Tien, Selina Chow, Miriam Lau, Felix Chung, Lam Man-kit [zh]), not just random people forming a joke party or something. The nom is absolutely right that there has been a significant drop in media coverage about this party after its closure. But the coverage we got is more than sufficient for a GNG pass, and Wikipedia also records history, so a notable political party, even if it no longer exists, is still worth documenting. —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 15:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
From the sources I think it's actually incorrect to call it a party - it was formed as a corporation to circumvent normal party formation requirements. However I still think the absence of any coverage outside of HK and the fact that it didn't have WP:LASTING coverage override the bare presence of a few sources. Simonm223 (talk) 15:46, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LASTING applies only to events, not defunct organizations. I also do not see any issues with notability merely because the coverage is local. Sources with a regional audience can still serve as strong evidence of notability per WP:AUD. The media outlets listed above, like HKET or HK01 or Initium, are among the most credible sources in Hong Kong. I think it is entirely reasonable for a local organization to operate solely within its region and exert local influence. It does not need to expand its influence to a global level or be reported by English-language sources to be considered notable (non-English sources are perfectly acceptable per WP:NONENG). Otherwise, it would promote an Anglo-centric bias on Wikipedia by rejecting subjects that have not received international or English-language coverage. —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 16:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would at least expect SCMP or similar to mention it if this group had even regional significance. Like we're not talking about press coverage limited to one country or to one province. We're talking about press coverage limited to one city. Simonm223 (talk) 17:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the term "regional" in WP:AUD (which is pipe-linked to Newspaper#Local or regional: A local newspaper serves a region such as a city, or part of a large city) is perfect for the case of Hong Kong, and I do not really understand the logic here: SCMP is still a local newspaper and should be dismissed if you are expecting coverage outside of Hong Kong specifically. I do not see a significant difference between SCMP and the Hong Kong Economic Times or Ming Pao aside from one being in English and the others in Chinese, which brings me back to my point about WP:NONENG. —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 17:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arjun Ambati

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

fails WP:NACTOR. Theroadislong (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, India, and Andhra Pradesh. Theroadislong (talk) 07:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article should be kept as Arjun Ambati is a notable figure in the Telugu film industry. He has a significant filmography, with key roles in well-known projects, and his work has been covered by various media outlets. Additionally, he has a Google Knowledge Panel, which is an indicator of recognition and notability in the public domain.

I am working on adding more reliable sources, including interviews and articles from established media, to strengthen the article. His contributions to the industry further demonstrate his standing and relevance.

Thank you for considering my input. Kanthrajmys (talk) 08:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Google knowledge panel does not mean anything in terms of notability at Wikipedia. --bonadea contributions talk 08:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – there is no coverage at all of him in independent sources, much less any significant coverage. --bonadea contributions talk 08:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback and for reviewing the article. I would like to gently highlight that Arjun Ambati has been covered by independent and reliable sources such as The Times of India, Eenadu, Sakshi, and Andhra Jyothy. His work in Telugu television and cinema has also been featured on platforms like Gemini TV and Telugu Filmnagar. While I understand that a Google Knowledge Panel alone doesn't establish notability, it does suggest public interest and recognition. I’m continuing to improve the article by adding more reliable sources.
Thanks again for your time and consideration. Kanthrajmys (talk) 08:44, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there are concerns about the sufficiency of the coverage, I am happy to move this article to the draft space and continue working on it. However, I believe the current available sources demonstrate significant notability for Arjun Ambati. His coverage in reputed national outlets, such as:
Pinkvilla (13 August 2021) - A review of Sundari, featuring his role.

The Times of India - Official trailer for Theppa Samudram.

IndiaTimes (31 July 2024) - Information on the OTT release of Theppa Samudram.

News18 - Announcement of his role in RC16.
These sources indicate notable attention from major national platforms, alongside his extensive career, including 10 films and numerous TV/web series.

If this is not sufficient for immediate approval, I am more than willing to move it to draft space and continue gathering additional sources or improving the article further. Kanthrajmys (talk) 11:55, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Despite his modest role, it is evident that he has participated in numerous films, television series, and reality shows. However, there is an absence of significant coverage. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 13:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:NACTOR. Charlie (talk) 17:46, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Altitude tent

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

Maybe redirect/merge this into altitude sickness? The current state of the article is definitely not sufficient. KnowledgeIsPower9281 (talk) 13:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

altitude training might be more fitting. Oreocooke (talk) 17:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Katherine Tudor of England

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

No evidence of actual notability for this princess who lived for just 8 days. I suggest redirecting to Elizabeth of York#Death and aftermath or another target if someone can suggest a better one. Fram (talk) 12:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, Royalty and nobility, and England. Fram (talk) 12:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question No notability for a Princess that is mentioned in over 50 different historical books? Govvy (talk) 13:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, no. Is she mentioned as anything else than the infant of Elizabeth of York and Henry VII which died after a few days? Is there a reason to have a separate article instead of just a redirect? Let's take e.g. the first Google Books hit: Tudor: The Faily History. She is a name in a family tree, and the complete text about her in this specialized book: "Two more children would die as infants: Edmund, born in 1499, and Katherine in 1503". The most I can find are a few lines, which just repeat what's said at the redirect target: birth, death, death of mother.[26] Fram (talk) 13:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Fram: There is such a thing as being notable through nobility, regardless of the length of life. It's just your choice of words. In fact, its a fatal floor in wikipedia to choose these words. As always, it's how you use the information you have. To me, choosing the right wording is important. Govvy (talk) 18:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And here I thought notability is not inherited. I must have missed the note that said that anyone is notable by force of being born from the right parents, no matter if their life had actually any real world impact beyond their direct family. Fram (talk) 19:28, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Engineering & Science College

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

Not a Notable College. Lacks secondary sources. Hardly any online presence of this organization. Fails GNG. Rahmatula786 (talk) 06:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Schools, Engineering, and Nepal. Rahmatula786 (talk) 06:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 12:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bahishti Zewar

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

There is no doubt that the subject is notable as a book. However, the authorship of the book is highly disputed, and even the content variations are debatable. This issue has been discussed by Ahlehaqmedia, a scholarly website. In its current form, the article would need to be entirely rewritten based on reliable sources. Given the present structure and sourcing, it is not suitable as a standalone article. I propose redirecting it to the article on Ashraf Ali Thanwi.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 15:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and India. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 15:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per WP:DINC 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: Easily meets WP:NBOOK and WP:N for its religious significance. Chronos.Zx (talk) 02:27, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Ashraf Ali Thanwi (one of the authors that has a wiki page). I don't think this is enough for notability and not for a stand alone article. Not much is mentioend in the article currently either. Ramos1990 (talk) 06:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The keep !votes are arguments to avoid, more input needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Christoph of Hohenlohe-Langenburg

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

The significance of the person is not shown. Only genealogical information and the cause of his death are given. – RobertVikman 13:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 13:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Prince Alfonso of Hohenlohe-Langenburg (his father) per WP:ATD. Ingratis (talk) 12:02, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I came here expecting this to be an easy delete !vote on a non-notable minor noble. However, a web search for "christoph zu hohenlohe", one version of his German name, turns up a bunch of significant coverage: [27][28][29], most of it about his death but some from long afterwards (that last link is from 2020). I'm gonna do a deeper dive for sourcing, but I'm leaving this here for now. Toadspike [Talk] 13:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is English-language sigcov on his death the Independent article already cited in the article [30], and French/German coverage in "L'étrange mort d' un noble lausannois", L'Illustré, 16.08.2006 by Arnaud Bédat; "Prinzessin Ira von Fürstenberg «Man hat meinen Sohn umgebracht»", Glückspost, 17.08.2006, by Marco Hirt and Roswitha vom Bruck;"Ende eines Genfer Jetset-Prinzen", Tages-Anzeiger, 11.08.2006, by Bernhard Hülsebusch. There is also an article over 1000 words long in the Sonntagsblick of 20.08.2006, titled "Keine Maiglöckchen im Knast", by Helmut-Maria Glogger.

Good search terms include "Christoph von Hohenlohe", "Christoph Prinz von Hohenlohe", "Christoph zu Hohenlohe", "Christoph Prinz zu Hohenlohe-Langenburg" (which appears to be his full and correct title), and "Christoph Vittorio Umberto" (his full first names). I see some articles from the time saying that his death was first reported in the Italian press, which I do not have great access too – for instance, my sources mention his brother and mother speaking to the Corriere della Sera, but I cannot find the original coverage in that paper. (The article current links to an English translation of a Corriere article, but this doesn't quote Ira, so clearly there was more.)

I don't think BLP1E or BIO1E preclude an article here, but in case that comes up I've also found some indications that he received significant coverage before his death. He is mentioned repeatedly in articles about his mother, Ira von Fürstenberg (a very underdeveloped article – she seems to have been quite famous). In a 1978 interview of Ira in the Schweizer Illustrierte, Christoph is mentioned several times, not least when the interviewer asks "Christoph hat anscheinend, wie man in den Zeitungen lesen kann, einen Riesenerfolg bei Frauen." ("Christoph clearly has, as one can read in the newspapers, great success with women.") – so he was clearly being covered elsewhere, too. Toadspike [Talk] 14:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you specified contain information about him. But the information specified there does not give him significance according to any of Wikipedia's criteria of significance.

When some aristocrat or any other famous person dies, they write about him in the news.

But neither the sources nor the article show significance according to which the article could be saved. RobertVikman (talk) 22:17, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there's coverage of his activities as a socialite and of his bizarre death. Bearian (talk) 21:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article does not provide anything other than the cause of death and genealogy. What significance criterion does this article meet? RobertVikman (talk) 07:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you did a proper WP:BEFORE search, you would see his philanthropic work. Bearian (talk) 19:34, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Norlk (talk) 15:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the father. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to his father Prince Alfonso of Hohenlohe-Langenburg. Not seeing notability as a socialite. Not enough for stand alone article. Ramos1990 (talk) 06:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Need more discussion about whether to keep or redirect, per Toadspike's comments
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tacoma (band)

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

Fails WP:MUSICBIO, WP:SIGCOV. Declined at draft (non-notable). No social media, streaming. No coverage. Refs are band interviews. scope_creep^Talk 11:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Tacoma is an active Canadian country band with festival credits including the 2021 Cars and Country Stars Music Festival, where they were reviewed as a breakout act.^[1] They’ve performed at major Alberta events such as the Southern Alberta Music Festival and Ol’ MacDonalds Resort Music Festival, and are currently receiving radio support. Additional independent coverage is being gathered to support notability. Socials are very active and being added as the process is being further understood.

—Xsbucks (talk) 18:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC) Xsbucks (talk) 18:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are completly uknown almost and festival credits doesn't make them notable. scope_creep^Talk 19:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Eddie Seah

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

Fails WP:CRIME. Nothing exceptionally unusual about this parricide, with just a blip of media notice in October 2024. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Singapore. Shellwood (talk) 13:59, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adaugo

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

Fails WP:NNAME. Nobody of this name has an article, much less the two recommended minimum by NNAME. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:02, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Poutavanh Phengthalangsy

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

Declined prod. All the sources are databases. No evidence of SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 10:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Laos. LibStar (talk) 10:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Laos at the 1996 Summer Olympics where the person's name is mentioned. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect – Per above. Svartner (talk) 17:08, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Julian Adyeri Omalla

AfDs for this article:

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

The person is not notable businessperson; the awards are not notable either. I cannot find proper third party reliable of the subject references. Seems the journalists are not very interested in this topic. Norlk (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UN link looks "good" but when you click on it and read it gives an interview format coverage, not reliable and not suitable for BLP:

https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/06/1093392

Julian Omalla, who is widely known as “Mama Cheers” after the popular juice brand “Cheers” that her company Delight Uganda produces, is now planning to expand with the construction of a new factory in the north of the country.

“When I launched my company, Delight Uganda Limited, in 1996, I didn’t know much about running a business. I started it from scratch, and had to overcome many challenges.

I remember walking for many kilometres, on bad roads, and working in my garden from morning to night. One of the low points came when my business partner ran off with all of the money I had raised to buy stock. All I had left was a wheelbarrow, to take fruit to market, and one red dress!

I couldn’t get any banks to finance my business, because I didn’t have any collateral, so raising funds to expand was an uphill task. Like most women in Uganda, I had to rely on savings and invest my profits back into the company.

This link https://unctad.org/news/prize-winning-ugandan-woman-entrepreneur-grows-juice-business-improves-community provides no significant coverage either, and neither this one https://observer.ug/business/julian-omalla-wins-un-award-for-inclusive-business-model/

Omalla thanked Enterprise Uganda and UNCTAD for the award, and pledged to continue working to support uplift rural women from poverty.

She said that she intends to reach at least one million women from the current 500,000, over the next 10 years. She also noted that Delight is in the process of installing a modern processing plant in the region so as to increase its capacity to be able to buy and process all the fruits produced by women farmers. Norlk (talk) 15:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...So is this a keep or delete, @Norlk ? Sanemero the Robot Prince (not really, it's a Gloryhammer reference) 16:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete. the coverage is not reliable. Interviews and BLP don't match on Wikipedia in terms of establishing the notability Norlk (talk) 13:34, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and Uganda. Shellwood (talk) 16:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There plenty of sources about her including couple of articles in New Vision (1, 2) and Daily Monitor (1, 2, 3)which are respected publications in Uganda. Also not sure why we suddenly think UN News is not reliable. FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this page was previously nominated for deletion, and passed/kept. What is the new claim with the current nom? FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did not see the reliable sources. The broad discussion is needed. None of the sources you mentioned pass SIGNIFICANT COV requirements. There are many about various companies' activities, memos signed, etc. but not about the businesswoman and her achievements Norlk (talk) 13:32, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
how is that different from the previous nom? FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not really notable material for a stand alone article. She is an entrepreneur, but that is not enough for a wikipedia article. Ramos1990 (talk) 06:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 09:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notifying participants in the previous AfD: @Old-AgedKid, @Tau Corvi, @Significa liberdade (who did not sign her comment). Toadspike [Talk] 09:28, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended reality

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

Taking to AFD as a courtesy for further consensus. Whether this topic is genuinely distinct from virtual reality, mixed reality, and augmented reality has been disputed by an editor. The editor has attempted to make WP:BOLD mergers of this page into augmented reality, under an argument that the topic of "extended reality" is only synonymous with augmented reality, and that "pages should represent real things, rather than concepts that only exist in academia". ViperSnake151 Talk 01:06, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. ViperSnake151 Talk 01:06, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clear original research. --Altenmann >talk 06:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's a high amount of coverage in academic sources (papers and books), a dedicated academic conference (International Conference on Extended Reality), IEEE participation, coverage in publications in journals from various fields (Computer Science, medical practice, geo-information). MarioGom (talk) 13:37, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Coverage of what? Augmented reality and virtual reality? The concept of "extended reality" is simply a buzzword. JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 11:24, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not about your opinion (or anyone else's), it's about what reliable sources say. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 09:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Convert to disambiguation page. After all, Extended reality is a GROUP of things, and that's what a disambiguation page is for, I think. I have made a draft for it. SeaDragon1 (talk) 14:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy House

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

Alright -- the subject of this article fails WP:GNG, and notability for companies because of lack of WP:SIGCOV, and WP:SUSTAINED in WP:RS. There are lots of sources, but they are either WP:ROUTINE, very old announcements of the opening, or not independent. This article has serious NPOV issues to go along with that -- seems like advertising and promotion. This article doesn't belong on Wikipedia. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, United States of America, and Washington. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soft keep: The article is in desperate need for and update and rewrite, but I found a few local newspaper sources about the subject [31] [32] [33] [34] and a mention in Time Magazine [35]. These articles aren't very old and are independent. Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Negousse Mengistou

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

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:SPORTSCRIT due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. The article currently only has references to databases, and all I could find in secondary sources was a namedrop at [[36]]. Let'srun (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, Olympics, and Ethiopia. Let'srun (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment; summoning @Habst, as this is their area of expertise. I can't immediately find any english coverage of this person, but then again the sources are most likely to be smaller Ethiopian newspapers from the 50s and 60s written in amharic. I will keep looking for sources. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 03:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We don't know that "smaller Ethiopian newspapers" covered cyclists. Not all sports get much coverage in every country at every time. Anyway, Wikipedia's current rules state that the coverage must be uncovered before creating articles, not after. Geschichte (talk) 14:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonymousScholar49, I appreciate being called an expert, but I am just another editor like you. The subject's Amharic name is ንጉሴ መንግስቱ, and it is used in a few articles ([37] [38] (use webarchive)), but mostly mentions that I can find. He might be covered in Jack Trickey's interview considering he was one of two cyclists to run into him, but we can't say that for sure as it's paywalled.

And for the record, not to be semantic but SPORTCRIT only mandates that SIGCOV must exist in articles, not from their inception; that rule was not in place at the time this article was created in 2014. --Habst (talk) 13:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 14:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-Finno-Ugric substrate

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

This is a bit of a difficult one. This page covers perhaps four separate topics - the Paleo-Laplandic Saami substrate (which to a lesser extent also occurs in Finnic), the substrate in the Finno-Permic languages (which here is misleadingly described as the Finno-Volgaic substrate even though it also occurs in Permic), the issue of toponyms in Finland, and the substrate in the Nganasan language. Combining these substrates into a single topic of "Pre-Finno-Ugric substrate" is not notable, but the topics individually may have some notability. The Paleo-Laplandic languages topic already has its own article, and the information about the Finno-Permic substrate should probably go to the article about Finno-Permic languages. Toponyms in Finland could maybe get its own article, and the discussion about the Nganasan language can just go to the language's article. Stockhausenfan (talk) 08:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Finland. Stockhausenfan (talk) 08:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: the term is definitely used at least in Russian-language publications (i.e. Eugene Helimski used it as an umbrella term for 5 separate but related topics) and it's no less legitimate than, say, "Pre-Indo-European languages" or "Pre-Greek substrate". By the way, what I've read on the substrate in Finno-Volgaic languages (Zhivlov & Aikio) make only very few mentions of similar substrate word in Permic. Finstergeist (talk) 20:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In this paper Aikio gives several examples that have Permic cognates, see pages 45-46, and he specifically mentions this:

"a surprisingly large part of the vocabulary traditionally reconstructed for

‘Finno-Volgaic’ and ‘Finno-Permic’ (UEW: 605–827) involves irregular sound cor-

respondences and other etymological difficulties."

I.e. Finno-Permic is specifically mentioned (also Finno-Volgaic, but that is a subset of Finno-Permic, and the vocabulary there has the same features such as abundance of š).

Stockhausenfan (talk) 21:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IBM and World War II

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

IBM's collaboration with Nazi Germany is already covered in the article about the book, so that part is duplicated here. The United States part is not notable enough for a separate article. I think this article is best deleted, or the US part is extended and this article is moved to something like IBM assistance to the United States government during World War II. PhotographyEdits (talk) 08:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. Shellwood (talk) 08:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Germany, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't really understand the problem. The topic of this page is undoubtedly notable. There is another page titled IBM and the Holocaust which is specifically about a book published under that title. Whether that latter page is notable or not is moot given it doesn't appear to be nominated for deletion. To me this nomination is doomed to failure given that the scope of the other page is clearly a book (and the book is clearly about a specific part of IBM history) and whilst it overlaps with the topic of this nom-ed page, by definition doesn't encompass it. Renaming pages or moving to redlinks is not normally something we discuss at AfD. JMWt (talk) 10:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My primary suggestion is to delete the page. AfDs can result in a consensus to merge or redirect so I don't really see the problem. The topic might be notable but the article feels like WP:SYNTH, the sources talk about specific parts of the article. PhotographyEdits (talk) 10:59, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Well we don't redirect to redlinks, so there's your answer. I don't have anything to add on your other points. JMWt (talk) 11:03, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment to summarize, we now have the following articles that summarize info about IBMs involvement during WWII:
- IBM and the Holocaust
- Business collaboration with Nazi Germany
- This article
- History of IBM

I would say that's a bit much. As an alternative proposal to deletion, I would suggest dramatically shortening the book article and moving that info here. The book is considered a reliable source, but using it in the book article is undue weight due to it being a primary source. PhotographyEdits (talk) 15:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep IBM and the Holocaust is an article on a specific book (full title:IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance between Nazi Germany and America's Most Powerful Corporation) by Edwin Black and not an overall topic; Business collaboration with Nazi Germany is about overall business collaboration with Nazi Germany (so not specific to IBM); History of IBM is an overall company history and not specific to their WWII history. I do think that this article should be built out, but I think IBM's WWII history-which ranges from the US Army's use of punch cards (a good example is highlighted in The Fog of War and described in depth by Robert McNamara and not to mention it assigned Major Major Major the rank of Major in Catch-22) to their involvement in the Holocaust and how IBM was able to profit off both sides of the war technically through Dehomag-does deserve a standalone article. That there are parts of IBM's WWII history in other articles is not a valid reason to delete an article specific to the topic. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, the book article is about the book, but the summary section in that article basically duplicates the current article. With the exception of the US-side, which is why I originally suggested to move that to a different article. PhotographyEdits (talk) 20:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which is why I recommend expanding the current article. I fail to see how a summary in an article of a book about a subject merits a deletion of an article on the actual subject. Best, GPL93 (talk) 21:02, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because of how extensive the summary is in the book article. Random example: Berlin: The Downfall 1945. It is described in a single sentence, and link to the articles in case that describe it in-depth. I think that is fine. My point for opening this AfD was because I don't think it's a good idea to duplicate the information across multiple articles. I'm not necessarily proposing removing it from the book article, though. PhotographyEdits (talk) 21:11, 15 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]

Beach Head (G.I. Joe)

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG entirely. Mostly plot article of a non-notable cartoon character. (The previous nomination was closed as procedural keep due to the nom's disruption, but the merits were not discussed at all). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Toys. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Gottfried

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

No indication of significance. References are passing mentions, profiles and interviews. scope_creep^Talk 07:05, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Authors, Businesspeople, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zero Hour (Zero Hour album)

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

No sources that I could find to confirm the article meeting WP:NALBUM. Most coverage of albums called "Zero Hour" is in reference to other albums with the same title. -Samoht27 (talk) 06:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. -Samoht27 (talk) 06:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul H Elovitz

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

Doesn't meet WP:NACADEMIC or WP:GNG. An article referenced entirely by Elovitz's own publications. Did reach associate professor level at Temple University; a long publication history, but Scopus shows limited impact (H-index=3), although that seems to be missing his pre-1996 work. Klbrain (talk) 16:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Connecticut. Shellwood (talk) 16:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment I could only find 2 academic reviews of a book that he co-edited: [39] [40] which is not enough for WP:NPROF or WP:NAUTHOR. However, he was the founder and editor in chief of Clio's Psyche which could contribute to WP:NPROF#8 but I dont know how "well established" that journal is. --hroest 21:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That journal is open access and publishes three to four issues per year; it's not listed by Journal Citation Reports so doesn't have an impact factor - that doesn't count as a well-established journal in my view. Klbrain (talk) 23:55, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I see nothing in his publication record that comes close to passing WP:NPROF, particularly as an associate professor of a small liberal arts college. Page contains multiple unsourced WP:Peacock paragraphs and the listed publications are from Pyschohistory News which is an unrefereed newsletter. If this AfD was not going on I would add a {{dubious}} to the page. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:02, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
comment regarding Dr. Paul Elovitz's notability according to WP:NACADEMIC

Related to Klbrain #1: Beyond reaching Associate Professor at Temple University, in later years Dr. Paul Elovitz was a Full Professor of History at Ramapo College, NJ retiring from his role in 1992. Also, at Ramapo College, Dr. Elovitz introduced courses that integrated Psychology and History, establishing his own curriculums in "Psychohistory" - which is a significant accomplishment for a historian: Integration of any psychological concepts into the field of history were previously met with resistance and scrutiny.

Related to hroest: Clio's Psyche is a peer-reviewed publication that was established over 30 years ago. It's peer review process is rigorous, involving a minimum of 5 peer reviewers from different fields of knowledge, such as: Psychology, psychoanalysis, anthropology, history, medicine and others. The standard for other well established peer reviewed journals is typically 2 peer-reviewers. The reason for Clio's Psyche utilizing 5 or more peer reviewers is the transdisciplinary nature of Psychohistory. Also, it is one of very few psychohistorical journals. Another journal that publishes psychohistorical materials is The Journal of Psychohistory.

Related to Klbrain #2: Starting in 2025, Clio's Psyche is being converted to electronic/searchable format and included in the CrossRef database with DOI numbers assigned. This process is still continuing, and will be finalized by September 2025. PepWeb is in the process of acquiring access to all Clio's Psyche issues, when the electronic conversion is done.

Related to LDM1954: Temple University is where Dr. Paul Elovitz started his career, but it was a short time. Dr. Paul Elovitz went on to a full professorship at Ramapo College.

Dr. Elovitz was elected as president of The International Psychohistorical Association, a 48 year old international organization. He is the only living contributor to every years annual conference of the organization. This year, May 23-25, 2025 will be the 48th annual conference of the International Psychohistorical Association.

Based on this input, what content do we need to clean and/or add into Dr. Elovitz's article to meet standards?

Thank you for your time. PsychologyAdvocate (talk) 14:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PsychologyAdvocate, you have misunderstood what makes an academic notable. All academics create courses, run conferences, many have elected positions in societies, these are routine for academics, please read WP:MILL. We require citations, favorable book reviews and/or major awards to demonstrate that peers consider them notable. None of what you mention above is relevant, sorry. Ldm1954 (talk) 16:45, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 05:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ldm1954, thank you for your feedback, this is helpful!

In the meantime, we will be revising the current article showing notability. We will be structurally basing the article on Dr. Otto Kernberg's Wikipedia page, showing that the institutions (The Psychohistory Forum) Dr. Elovitz created as well as the peer-reviewed journal (Clio's Psyche) are transdisciplinary and unique. For example, Clio's Psyche is one of two existing peer-reviewed psychohistorical journals; and The Psychohistory Forum, which has a 40yr history, is a place for academicians, clinicians, students and professors, across diverse fields of knowledge, coming together to discuss and help each other in their work in a hands-on manner - laying a foundation for the field of Psychohistory.

Uniqueness often is difficult to compare. Do you have a recommendation for describing pioneering work?

Thank you in advance for your time. PsychologyAdvocate (talk) 13:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Until his peers recognize the work there is nothing you can do. Wikipedia is a trailing indicator, we are very conservative about what we accept.

N.B., don't use that article, it is awful as I just indicated on it. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hosting Controller

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

None of the references establish notability. I see only a few relevant hits on Google (The company name is very generic, though.): [41][42][43][44] and similar. All of them seemingly fail all criteria of WP:SIRS. This PDF could possibly have some SIRS coverage on the product, but I think that that is too little to establish notability. Janhrach (talk) 20:21, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Canada. Janhrach (talk) 20:21, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

I would like to respectfully oppose the deletion of this article.

Hosting Controller is a long-standing and recognized name in automating service provisioning, user management, billing and metering for various on-premises and Cloud services including web hosting, Microsoft Exchange, SharePoint, Skype for Business, Azure and Microsoft CSP program, with over two decades of history and global usage. While the company name may appear generic, the product and brand "Hosting Controller" have a distinct and established presence, especially within the Windows hosting and hybrid cloud automation space.

The following points support notability:

External Review:

There are third-party sources, including [industry articles, hosting review platforms, and integration announcements] that cover Hosting Controller’s product offerings, partnerships, and impact in the hosting industry. These sources include:

Articles in web hosting review platforms.

Mentions and integrations with Microsoft Exchange, Hyper-V, and other enterprise systems.

Inclusion in hosting control panel comparisons and industry whitepapers.

Longevity and Industry Use:

Hosting Controller has been active since at least 1999, with a consistent product line evolving with market demands—from shared hosting control panels to hybrid cloud automation solutions.

Product Uniqueness:

Its support for hybrid environments (Windows/Linux/cloud) and integration with platforms like Microsoft Exchange, SharePoint, and Office 365 sets it apart from more common cPanel-style products.

Potential Sources:

The company documentation (e.g., whitepapers, PDFs) may not seem like SIRS at first glance, but many are cited or used by third parties in evaluations, comparisons, or implementation case studies. I’m happy to help surface more third-party mentions if needed.

Given the depth of its niche, industry presence, and long-term use, I believe Hosting Controller meets the criteria for notability and request that the article be improved rather than deleted. Zaighum Khalique (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please name the URLs you have found. I haven't found anything except the said PDF document. Janhrach (talk) 08:33, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. As requested, I am sharing specific third-party and platform references that demonstrate Hosting Controller's notability and industry relevance:

In-depth third-party coverage:

▶"Hosting Controller Delivers a Hybrid Automation Solution for Service Providers" – HostingAdvice.com (2021)

This is a professionally written and independently published piece that provides a detailed overview of Hosting Controller’s features, hybrid automation value, and market differentiation. It qualifies as a secondary source under WP:SIRS.

Industry presence on major platforms:

▶ AWS Marketplace Profile

▶ Microsoft Azure Marketplace Listing

These are not news articles per se, but they establish Hosting Controller’s integration and credibility within top-tier enterprise ecosystems. Inclusion on these platforms requires vetting and compliance, reflecting notability in its niche.

Given this, I respectfully request that the article be retained and improved, rather than deleted. Zaighum Khalique (talk) 05:37, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As for the latter two sources, they are neither secondary, nor independent from the subject. As for HostingAdvice, their website is blacklisted on Wikipedia, because someone has spammed links to the website, which is a good indicator that they publish paid-for content. Also, the author of the article you mentioned seemingly only publishes promotional articles. Janhrach (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

I respectfully oppose the deletion of this article.

Notability and Independent Coverage

Hosting Controller has been profiled by a well-established industry publication, HostingAdvice.com, in the article “Hosting Controller Delivers a Hybrid Automation Solution for Service Providers,” which provides an in-depth, independently written overview of its features, market positioning, and hybrid cloud value proposition

HostingAdvice.com

.

Integration in Major Enterprise Ecosystems

The product’s listing on the AWS Marketplace underscores its enterprise credibility—participation in AWS Marketplace requires rigorous vendor vetting and demonstrates real‐world use by customers across Amazon’s ecosystem

Amazon Web Services, Inc.

.

Likewise, Hosting Controller is available on the Microsoft Azure Marketplace, reflecting its validation as a turnkey control-panel solution for Azure virtual machines and confirming its alignment with Microsoft’s partner quality standards

Azure Marketplace

.

Longevity and Global Adoption

The software has been in continuous development since 1999, evolving from a Windows-only control panel to a full hybrid-cloud automation suite used by over 5,000 organizations in 125 countries

HostingAdvice.com

.

This two-decade track record evidences sustained industry relevance and distinguishes it from ephemeral or trivial products

Wikipedia

.

Unique Feature Set and Industry Impact

Compared to generic cPanel-style offerings, Hosting Controller’s hybrid multi-cloud support (Windows/Linux, on-premises and public clouds) and deep integrations with Microsoft Exchange, SharePoint, Skype for Business, and Office 365 set it apart in the Windows hosting and CSP market

hostingcontroller.com

.

Independent analyses on hosting review platforms and whitepapers routinely include Hosting Controller in their comparisons of enterprise control panels, further demonstrating its recognized niche impact

Wikipedia

.

Conclusion and Request for Improvement

Given its significant third-party coverage, enterprise-scale integrations, and longstanding market presence, Hosting Controller clearly meets WP:SIRS and WP:GNG criteria for notability. Rather than deletion, the article should be retained and expanded with these reliable sources to improve its coverage and verifiability. Casaidealeriparazioni (talk) 09:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete. This is spam, standard BEFORE shows nothing meeting SIRS, there's nothing in ProQuest or Gale either, and honestly what exists is so far from the bar I can't believe the socks expected anyone to take them seriously. Even if there were such sources, this would still be spam, so blow it up. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:18, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 05:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Statue of Tom Seaver

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

I'm more concerned that the statue's notability is inherent rather than independent, despite the sources. Sure, detailing the statue is nice for readers to know, but such relevant info is mergeable into the parent article, Tom Seaver § Awards and honors. Also, I can't help wonder whether the article as-is violates WP:NOTNEWS or WP:NOTEVERYTHING. George Ho (talk) 05:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Baseball, and New York. George Ho (talk) 05:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Despite being the creator of this article, I suppose I should give the reasoning behind this. I'd argue keep; the statue notable in it being the first - and, to date, only - MLB park statue in NYC. Its also one of the few statues of sportspeople in NYC in general, depicting an iconic cultural figure of the city. Its also one of the few noteworthy statues in Queens, New York.

Its also a statue which was long fought for and which caused considerable controversey due to the timing of its announcement after the depictee's diagnosis with dementia and, a year later, untimely death. There is more than enough reasonable info about the statue itself to justify a fork, rather than unnecessarily loading up the main article with extra details about the controversy surrounding the statue. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets GNG and per Omnis Scientia. I could repeat much of what they say above, and argue further for keeping this unique and important statue, but what comes to mind about this nomination is, why? Randy Kryn (talk) 09:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what comes to mind about this nomination is, why? Maybe you'll see me as too prejudiced, but do I need to explain myself about something this obvious? If that's not obvious, I'll ask this: Do we need (a flood of) other articles about statues of certain athletes, like this person? Sure, a statue is of an honor, but a standalone article about this statue... Seriously, is this suitable for the project? Other than the inscription, I see no other content that is not mergeable to the parent article, IMO. I fail to see how this article would grow over time, honestly. (No offense to the article creator.) George Ho (talk) 12:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This seems to have significant coverage in NY Times and, to a lesser extent, the NY Daily News and Reuters. The proposed statue had coverage several years before it was actually unveiled, and there was also some coverage in CBS Sports and Fox News about the statue having an incorrect jersey number. I think the nominator's argument of WP:NOTEVERYTHING isn't exactly applicable here, since one could just rebut with WP:NOTPAPER. However, I will say that the sourcing I found isn't enough to expand this beyond more than a start-class article, at least for the moment. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As the initiator, I may have to withdraw this nomination if there are no "delete" or "merge" votes within very short time (i.e. reasonably shorter time than a week) if not less than a week. —George Ho (talk) 18:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Classifier (UML)

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

This is clearly more like a guide than an encyclopedia article. JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 05:08, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Unified Modeling Language. Hyper-specific UML concept that does not need a standalone page. MarioGom (talk) 19:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OceanWorld 3D

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

Contested PROD. Fails WP:GNG. Cannot find any suitable references or reviews that prove WP:NFILM. Seeking a redirect to Disneynature. Anarchyte (talk) 04:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Animal, and Disney. Anarchyte (talk) 04:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, added a review from CineMagazine, which is a WP:RS. Another review would be needed to pass WP:NFILM DonaldD23 talk to me 12:06, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Turkish film magazine Sinema has written something about the film: [45]. Low res scan, hard to even transcribe that. --Mika1h (talk) 12:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers characters

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

I think this article should be deleted because it primarily only serves people who have a large interest in the fictional characters, otherwise it serves no use to anyone else. JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 04:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Lists. Shellwood (talk) 08:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Deletion is not a substitute for cleanup and this is a notable list that is in poor shape, it should be rewritten and not deleted. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am going to WP:AGF but the nomination isn't convincing. I have a hard time believing this isn't suitable for an article. Suitable for clean-up? Certainly. But AFD isn't the place for that discussion. Archrogue (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep per criterion 3, No accurate deletion rationale has been provided. The argument advanced neither cites, nor hints at, anything in WP:DEL#REASON. Jclemens (talk) 16:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep, no valid reason for deletion given - not something to waste a week on. Geschichte (talk) 17:29, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Lamanske

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

No notable coverage in the press, the only sources were compilers with data about the player's performance DankPedia (talk) 04:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Sports, and Baseball. DankPedia (talk) 04:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - my own search came up empty--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 05:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets GNG like every MLB player, see e.g. headline stories such as this, and other things such as this and this among others. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

InstaPay

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

The app is not notable by its own, and it does not have enough reliable third party sources with journalistic significant not just press-released coverage. All the sources within the page and the ones I managed to find BEFORE are only event-based - Egypt's central bank launched... Norlk (talk) 15:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep InstaPay is a nationally significant app in Egypt, launched under the Egyptian Central Bank's strategy for digital payments. It is widely adopted and integrated into government and private banking systems. many sources talked about it such as her bankygate.com and enterprise.news and ahram.org.eg Mohamed Ouda (talk) 19:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article subject could be mentioned in the article about the Central Bank of Egypt and this article redirected there as an alternative to deletion. Pavlor (talk) 05:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A notable product in the financial world, with notability backed up by reliable sourcing.Simxaraba (talk) 09:25, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Software, and Egypt. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Austin Bat Cave

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

Subject does not appear to be notable upon search - there are articles such as the Austin Chronicle, but they are not WP:SIGCOV so there's no reason to presume that the subject is notable. The current state of the article also only has one reference, which is their own website. Also slight WP:NPOV issues. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Texas. WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:41, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Per WP:NOTCLEANUP, I have begun to add references to the article and fix the language. I am still finding more refs, but it is already a very different article than what it was before. StonyBrook _babble 09:21, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This literacy organization meets GNG and NCORP by way of the following newspaper articles that are available via the Newspaper Archive & Newspapers.com (requires access): Daily Texan (9 Nov 2015) Nonprofit Austin Bat Cave teaches, publishes children's creative writing which is a front page newspaper feature article (two pages long, with photo); Brownsville Herald a half-page article (29 July 2019) with four photographs Expressive Project: Teaching writing is as important as reading; Lockhart Post Register (8 September 2022) Evening with the Authors a paragraph on the founder of Austin Bat Cave; The Paducah Sun (18 July 2019) Is teaching writing as important as teaching reading? feature article with three photos of Austin Bat Cave, later picked up by the The Saginaw News 23 August 2019) and circulated nationally; Austin American-Statesman (12 Jan 2017) Out - several paragraphs and a photo of the founder; Austin American-Statesman (16 April 2011) Tutors with Austin Bat Cave help students get their wings - feature article with photo on the front page of the "Life & Arts" section, continued on a second page as a half-page article with three more photos; and more. These sources (and others) clearly provide the required secondary Significant Coverage in multiple reliable sources that are fully independent of the organization over an extended period of time - for years. The coverage addresses the subject in-depth and directly. I agree with StonyBrook that the article may need cleaning up and improvements, however that is not a valid rationale for deletion. Netherzone (talk) 13:35, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merian Centre for Advanced Studies in the Maghreb

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

Bilateral research centre sourced to the websites of related organisations, lacking in depth coverage in reliable independent sources. Does not pass WP:NCORP. Mccapra (talk) 03:54, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Tunisia, and Germany. Mccapra (talk) 03:54, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did this come from draft space? If so, send it back for more work. If not, send it there for more work. Hyperbolick (talk) 04:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s past the 90 day deadline for sending to draft without coming to AfD first.Mccapra (talk) 20:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Girls High School

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

Apparent lack of notability, no good quality sources readily apparent in this article. This is just some small school. JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 03:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Telangana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete fails WP:SIGCOV most of the sources arent even about this high school. --hroest 13:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: "Before 2017, secondary schools were assumed notable unless sources could not be found to prove existence, but following a February 2017 RFC, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist, and are still subject both to the standards of notability, as well as those for organizations." See WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Charlie (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coney Island Film Festival

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

I do not see notability for this film festival as the sourcing is local without the depth needed to establish notability. A merger to CIUSA might be merited, but I'm not sold on that either. Star Mississippi 03:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Events, and New York. Star Mississippi 03:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from the reviewer who accepted this at AfC, happy to chime in. I will note that this was a rather borderline acceptance but the draft (now article) did a good job of paring down to just containing the independent reviews of the otherwise routine coverage of the event. The Brooklyn Rail's coverage "Brooklyn's Beachfront Romance With Cinema Continues at the Coney Island Film Festival" does contain some of the most independent analysis but the quoted pieces in the article should be analyzed here (source assessment table anyone?) to see the depth of their independent coverage relative to the article as a whole could meet WP:THREE or if the breadth of the coverage makes up for any shortfalls therein. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 13:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The Coney Island Film Festival has been held annually since 2001 and has received repeated coverage in independent, reliable sources including the Brooklyn Eagle, Time Out New York, Brooklyn Paper, Brooklyn Rail, and MovieMaker Magazine. While the depth of each individual source varies, taken together they meet the WP:GNG threshold and satisfy WP:NEVENT. The subject is clearly verifiable and has maintained public relevance for over two decades. — Albieabbiati (talk) 15:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Victorian Photonics Network

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

No WP:SIGCOV, fails WP:GNG. ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 22:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Australia. ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 22:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Couldn't find anything to suggest it passes WP:GNG. The article in The Age confirms that it was involved in redesigning the Victorian physics curriculum, but only provides a passing mention. I wasn't able to find anything else of note. MCE89 (talk) 10:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ratalaika Games

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

Seems to fail WP:NCORP - simple as that. Lacks secondary sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:59, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

i made the page, but i see where you're coming from, added a few more sources to do my best attempt. ive seen similar pages sourcing/notability wise, i believe it should stay and grow sr1jj (ᴛ) 15 May 2025

@Sr1jj:, please format your comment/vote properly. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I am finding a lot of sources but the company is just mentioned along with the games. As it is a company, it must meet WP:NCORP which means there needs to be in-depth coverage, not just mentions. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

North Valley Hospital

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

Doesn't satisfy WP:N and there are limited WP:RS When doing my WP:BEFORE i only found WP:PRIMARY sources, signifying that this hospital does not deserve its own Wikipedia article. DankPedia (talk) 23:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Medicine, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of companies involved in the Gaza genocide

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

This article is clearly a violation of WP:NEUTRAL. Regardless of the title of the Gaza genocide article, we don't need a list of companies that supply weapons that implies they support genocide in Wikipedia's voice. BilCat (talk) 23:13, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. BilCat (talk) 23:13, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Category:Companies involved in the Gaza genocide is connected with this article, but I don't know how to include it, or if it should be nominated separately. BilCat (talk) 23:18, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion: This article does not claim that these companies support genocide in Gaza—it documents their involvement in it, as clearly stated in the introduction. It will include not only companies supplying weapons, but also those providing technology, funding, and other forms of support ( will be added later ).

A similar precedent exists with the List of companies involved in the Holocaust article and category Category:Companies involved in the Holocaust. Cinaroot (talk) 23:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion: see Cinaroot's comment and the title is also "List of companies involved in the Gaza genocide" and not "List of companies supporting the Gaza genocide" Laura240406 (talk) 23:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion. Would support re-naming to "List of companies involved in the Gaza war" or some other variant if there are NPOV concerns. EvansHallBear (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will also point the nation article [46] also mentions genocide in gaza where they referenced the list by American Friends Service Committee. [47] Cinaroot (talk) 23:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: that would defeat the purpose though as the list specifically refers to companies that are involved in actions that belong to the broader topic of the Gaza genocide. e.g. a company that produces aid packages would be involved in the war but not in the genocide (bad example but you get the point). Laura240406 (talk)

Fair point. "List of companies involved in Gaza war crimes" would've been a better suggestion. I don't see any problems with the current title personally, but was trying to say that a title change is preferable to a total deletion. EvansHallBear (talk) 03:59, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Leaving aside the questions of neutrality and phrasing, this is not a notable intersection for these companies. The fact This article does not claim that these companies support genocide in Gaza—it documents their involvement in it, means it's non-defining, and while that applies specifically to categories, the fact is that none of these companies are notable - it's a WP:COATRACK of sorts to shame the companies in question. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: COATTRACK doesn't apply here though as there are at least 2 sources (see the external links section) that tie all these companies together as profiteers and lists their involvement. Laura240406 (talk) 00:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 00:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 00:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve. Per our list notability rules, the company's involvement does not need to be a defining characteristic. Only the topic of companies being involved has to be notable. IMV it is, so I'm opposing deletion. (t · c) buidhe 02:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing NLIST. Nominator stands correct that the title is bad, yet that part can be changed to something along the lines of companies that supply sides in the Gaza War, or that supply the IDF in the Gaza War. The absence of sources for this list as whole, however, is not a coincidence. The IDF has suppliers of military equipment and these companies really belong to IDF discussions. The supplies are not specific to the Gaza War. For Hamas, state actors are often indicated as suppliers and this is already discussed elsewhere. Supplies were largely or entirely cut off by the IDF. gidonb (talk) 05:06, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There are sources though: here here here and here (taken from the external links section) Laura240406 (talk) 12:29, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These sources exemplify the weakness of the argument to keep. Only one of the sources provided is somewhat independent. And even then, The Nation identifies itself as a progressive publication. This means that it has a particular political perspective, and its content should be treated with appropriate caution and attributed to its perspective. In this case it decided to tie general supply information of the IDF to alleged crimes. That isn't NPOV, neither is our article. The other sources provide organizational opinions. One of the sources you provided is even a press release! Now I see that you BLUDGEONE under each other opinion that is different from yours, so maybe next round I will explain in even greater detail the importance of organic and responsible growth and of neutrality of our encyclopedia. gidonb (talk) 15:30, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are of course additional secondary sources in the list tying the use of specific weapons to Israeli war crimes in the Gaza war. These war crimes are well documented by human rights groups and experts. Although The Nation is biased it is considered a WP:RS. Per WP:POVDELETION, concerns about NPOV can be addressed over time and don't warrant deleting the entire article. Dismissing the opinions of multiple UN independent experts because they are in a press release seems like WP:IDONTLIKEIT.

Laura240406 has made 6 comments so far, all responding to different arguments in a WP:CIVIL fashion. It seems a bit premature to accuse her of WP:BLUDGEON. EvansHallBear (talk) 16:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - my reasoning is a little unusual but runs as follows; it's a serious allegation to make that a company should be added to this list and the risk of false-positives (meaning fake information or wrongly adding a similarly named company) would seem to be high. Unless a company itself was proud of its involvement and publicly stated as such, I don't see that there is sufficient historical inquiry to warrant a page. In my view and without assuming bad faith on anyone, this is currently not an appropriate use of Wikipedia. JMWt (talk) 11:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: it's not an allegation as all entries are based on reliable sources proving their involvement and the "false-positive" argument doesn't really hold because of WP:TRUTH. If the sources say so, we say so. Laura240406 (talk) 12:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With respect, whilst the entries currently on the page are arguably well sourced, the debate is about the topic and the potential that it could be a problem.

There are issues of verifiability and edit-warring within these topics, which is why they are subject to special editing restrictions. Having this page is an open invitation for spreading disinformation in my opinion. JMWt (talk) 12:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
that's why I've nominated it for extended protection per Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict Laura240406 (talk) 12:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By this standard, Wikipedia couldn't have any articles on contentious topics. There are policies is place for dealing with disinformation, so deleting the article entirely isn't warranted. I definitely agree that care needs to be taken to avoid tenuous links or turning this into a BDS list EvansHallBear (talk) 16:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is liable and needs to be deleted as Wikipedia can be sued for this kind of content. Govvy (talk) 13:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia only reproduces what the source say so they would have to sue the sources, not Wikipedia itself.

Also see e.g. here. Laura240406 (talk) 13:28, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter, wikipedia can still be liable for what it has. In fact, there is the ability to circumvent wikipedia and actually go directly to a user and sue that person for adding liable information to wikipedia. Either way, this kind of content isn't neutral and should be avoided. Govvy (talk) 14:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That invalidates your point though since the editors themselves would be liable and not Wikipedia as a whole. This is also not defamation since it's based on sources and doesn't alledge anything. The article doesn't include any speculations as to who is legally responsible or who vocally supports the genocide. It just lists suppliers of the weapons that are used for the genocide and related war crimes, which are statements that are easy to proof and verify.

e.g. the IAF carpet bombs Gaza using F35Is -> Lockheed Martin produces them specifically for the IAF -> Lockheed Martin produces the fighter jets used for carpet bombing

Every step of this example can be backed by sources and the logical conclusions can also be backed by sources so it's not original research. There is no room for interpretation or defamation here. Laura240406 (talk) 16:34, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not a legal expert, but my understanding is that laws like Section 230 (in the U.S.) protect platforms from liability for user-generated content. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, disputed material can be challenged and removed through established editorial processes. It’s not up to individual editors to assess legal liability — our role is to ensure content aligns with Wikipedia’s core policies: verifiability, neutral point of view (NPOV), and no original research.

Whether or not Wikipedia can be sued is a legal question beyond the scope of editorial decisions. What matters here is whether the material follows wiki policies. If it meets those standards, it belongs — even if it’s uncomfortable or controversial. Cinaroot (talk) 17:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Personal attack removed)
Keep: neutrality of the title aside, companies involved in Gaza genocide is something regularly covered in reliable sources, usually in the context of boycotts or geopolitical issues. And they are not only covered individually, they are often discussed as a group, even if it's just a small subset at a time. For example, articles discussing which companies supply weapons. --MarioGom (talk) 19:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete mostly per Bushranger above. There are only 4 articles with the title "list of companies involved..." - two of them are about being involved in specific fields. The other is List of companies involved in the Holocaust. That article makes very clear that it is a defining characteristic of the companies involved directly supporting the Holocaust through things like utilizing forced labor, or directly engaging in censorship, or building new plants/factories to specifically support the actions of the regime in severe ways. Merely selling arms to a military who went on to be accused of war crimes is not a defining characteristic - otherwise, we would have an article listing companies involved in the construction or operation of the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, for example.
In other words, the one other similar article has clear intentional links between the companies and the war crimes committed. On the other hand, this article is virtually entirely "guilt by association". There is zero evidence that any of the companies listed so far have done anything differently to "support" the actions of the military. In other words, it's an attempt at advocacy through a WP:COATRACK - saying "hey, look at this list of companies that are supplying the Israeli military". It is not a defining feature of these companies, and it is not an independently notable topic. It is likely that the information on who supplies the Israeli military (both now and historically) is due weight to include in an article about the Israeli military. But attempting to split this out like this is nothing more than a POV fork and should not be tolerated.
Lastly, even if people think the above issues aren't present, this is a clear example of why WP:NOPAGE exists. Other information provides needed context for this that is not possible to present in a table/list format, such as the history of the conflict, the actual way that the companies' supplies have been used, the use of other supplies not listed in the table, etc. Whereas, again, this page can only ever serve as "ooh look at this list of companies that you should dislike because they supply the Israeli military" - and actually does our readers a disservice by splitting this off from the context and information that would be presented if it were included in other relevant articles, following WP:DUE, of course. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 20:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I don't think your first paragraph holds water. For example IBM were not, as far as I know, directly using slave labour during the Holocaust, they were supplying computer equipment. And they're on the list you mention.

Similarly I don't think your second holds much water; continuing the analogue you've introduced, a chemical company which knowingly supplied Nazi death camps in full knowledge of what the chemicals would be used for were not just "guilty by association"

The difference with the Holocaust and this article is that there has been extensive historical research and academic debate about the topic since the 1950s. In the current situation the killing isn't even over. JMWt (talk) 20:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would support removing IBM from that list then as they were not directly and intentionally involved in the Holocaust. And you seem to be agreeing with my second point - a chemical company (such as BASF, listed in that article) that knowingly sold chemicals specifically to be used for mass murders, and even built a new factory at a concentration camp to be used specifically to supply it... well yeah, that's clearly more than "guilt by association". Merely supplying a military is "guilt by association" without more information and context. Hence why this page should not exist as a standalone list/article. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 21:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹ (Tadg^Talk) 20:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Big Brain Wolf

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

I can only find 2 reviews in reliable sources, Adventure Gamers and Gamezebo. With a lack of reliable reviews, it appears to fail WP:GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Mika1h (talk) 12:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - Additional sources:
- 1. Review by de:Adventure-Treff (unclear reliability), See deletion discussion of Adventure-Treff at German Wikipedia. The article was decided to be kept because Adventure-Treff was cited in several academic books. Also Adventure Gamers has re-printed their articles: [48], [49], and GameStar has reposted their news: [50]. I think this review pushes the notability slightly above keep, unless someone can argue that they are clearly an unreliable source.
- 2. Article by Lien MULTIMÉDIA (requires subscription) (unclear reliability & independence), written by a journalist who has also written for Voir and fr:Clin d'œil (magazine). Since it's not fully readable, I can't determine if the article is mostly an interview or is there enough SIGCOV.
- 3. Review by Softonic (unclear reliability), Inconclusive discussion at WP:VG/S.
- 4. News article by La Presse, below significant coverage, not enough critical analysis. --Mika1h (talk) 12:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan's Next Top Model

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

The source is a "news of the weird" type story that appeared in English language outlets in 2007. The actual name of the show does not appear in the articles. A briefly mentioned unnamed show does not add up to notability. Gamaliel (talk) 02:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Fashion, and Afghanistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael P.J. Gerstein

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

Non-notable American entrepreneur. At best WP:TOOSOON. Can't find RSs to meet WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 02:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clarks, Indiana

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

Another spot back=added to the topos via GNIS from the state highway maps, it settles on an isolated farmstead, but that may be coincidence. Topos show a Monon line running north by this spot, so it could be a rail spot, or perhaps a 4th class post office. But a town it is definitely not. Mangoe (talk) 02:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Powerlifting Alliance

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

The article is almost entirely based on primary sources. A search for third party sources reveals just 1 google news hit. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 01:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Sports, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 01:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seyberts, Indiana

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

Baker identifies it as a post office, though topos show it was probably also a rail station, as it sits adjacent to a long-abandoned rail grade which is almost completely vanished but which is quite plain in the oldest aerials. There's no town here and mo sign there ever was. Mangoe (talk) 00:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a town, just a post office named for the proprietor. Reywas92^Talk 13:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Al Qabila FC

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

Still fails WP:NSPORT, even though a source ([51]) has recently been added. GTrang (talk) 00:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and United Arab Emirates. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I removed the redlinks, addded sources, cleaned up up some of the citeneeded content. Al Ittihad is, BTW, a national daily. ~~It's still very, very borderline and possibly WP:TOOSOON but~~ I believe this new club now ~~squeaks~~ glides in past WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:34, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Plenty around to help notability, [52] that third source in the article is good from TalkSport, and the signing of Papiss Cisse [53], [54]. There are many sources that can be used. The article will only grow over time. The club will either sink or swim. There are lots of sources out there that can be used. Govvy (talk) 09:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Due to the small number of professional clubs in the UAE, I believe that all of them have adequate coverage. Svartner (talk) 15:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources/arguments above which show notability. Giant Snowman 18:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lxs Dos

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

Non-notable Mexican/American artist couple. can't find RSs that establish WP:ARTIST, and given their significant work was produced in the 2010s, such RS should already exist. Cabrils (talk) 00:41, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabrils: I have cited various RSs for LxsDos to prove notability i.e. "primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work" AND "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers" per WP:ARTIST. In addition to a New York Times article and other periodicals, LxsDos are also featured in a Routledge Companion published book (cited on the page) and the other is an academic text titled "Exploring the Transnational Neighbourhood: Perspectives on Community-Building, Identity and Belonging." This latter text features an analysis of LxsDos's most notable work and their work is also the book's cover. Very perplexed as to why this is not enough. Is there a minimum amount required? Philomena7 (talk) 01:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Philomena7,

Thanks for the information. Perhaps if you can provide WP:THREE that would help? For example, while Lxs Dos are mentioned and quoted in the NYT article, I'm not sure the content is sufficiently substantive to meet the requirement of being the "primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews..." (my emphasis added)...? Thanks. Cabrils (talk) 02:05, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noted! Thank you for this clarity. I have added another periodical source where it is the main source of the article. I am also new to writing articles, so I am still learning how much secondary source analysis is appropriate within the Wiki article itself. Would you be able to look over my new edits? Philomena7 (talk) 02:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Philomena7, that addition helps a lot.

Could you please confirm you do not have a conflict of interest?

Thanks, Cabrils (talk) 05:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No conflict of interest! My main motivation is that this article was part of a Wikipedia assignment for a university art history course I was enrolled in, and I dedicated time to learning about my assigned artist, finding sources, and learning Wikipedia’s writing approaches. So I’m invested in the sense that I want to make sure my project (even though I already got my grade for this last year) stays in mainspace. Philomena7 (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
P.S I should also add that my grade had nothing to whether or not my article remained in mainspace. Contributing to Wikipedia just became something I was passionate about. Thanks for the input on my edits. Is there anything else I should edit/add? Philomena7 (talk) 12:12, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Philippines, Mexico, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of professional baseball teams based in Fort Wayne, Indiana

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

Unsourced list which seems to fail WP:NLIST. I find no independent reliable sources that justify this being a standalone list. Although each of these teams existed, that does not justify a list. If sources are added, this might be a merger candidate to the section History of Fort Wayne, Indiana. Without any sources, it's trivia that fails notability guidelines. Flibirigit (talk) 00:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Baseball, Lists, and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of professional baseball teams based in Davenport, Iowa

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

Unsourced list which seems to fail WP:NLIST. I find no independent reliable sources that justify this being a standalone list. Although each of these teams existed, that does not justify a list. If sources are added, this might be a merger candidate to History of Davenport, Iowa. Without any sources, it's trivia that fails notability guidelines. Flibirigit (talk) 00:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Baseball, Lists, and Iowa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:24, 15 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 keep‎. UtherSRG (talk) 00:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kilimanjaro shrew

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

Not a notable species of animal. When doing my WP:BEFORE the only sources I could find are websites that take summaries of Wikipedia articles. DankPedia (talk) 23:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Kenya, and Tanzania. DankPedia (talk) 23:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this was a mistake DankPedia (talk) 23:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: All eukaryote species are notable per WP:NSPECIES. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:53, 15 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.

Georgi Tunguliyadi

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

While this footballer plays in the premier league and seems likely to be notable in the future, I've been unable to find sources to establish notability now; the page cites a database entry and a social media post, and nothing better turns up on my search. — Moriwen (talk) 23:52, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Portugal. — Moriwen (talk) 23:52, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 15. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – The coverage in Russian sources looks enough to WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 15:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. 0 league games is a big problem, and there is also a problem with reliability of the sources. Geschichte (talk) 17:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Greece and Russia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Holafly

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

This appears to be a basic summary of a non-notable commercial operation - no assertion of notability is made, and the service it provides is routine / non-innovative. A mention in a list of eSIM operators would seem sufficient. SeoR (talk) 00:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. SeoR (talk) 00:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and Ireland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Spain. MarioGom (talk) 19:44, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

^ Street, Jamie (2021). "Tacoma Brought Down the House at Cars and Country Stars 2021". Cars and Country Stars. Retrieved 2025-05-15.

[1] Street, Jamie (2021). "Tacoma Brought Down the House at Cars and Country Stars 2021". Cars and Country Stars. Retrieved 2025-05-15.

[1]