Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/TWP:AFD/T

30 June 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

< June 29	July 01 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Guandou Subdistrict

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

Doesn't meet WP:NTOWN, doesn't seem to have non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Soviet straight-winged jet fighters

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

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NLIST, we don't have lists like this for other entities. Unsourced since 2017. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Aviation. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Faruk G Patel

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

Created by a now-blocked COI paid-for editor, further buffed by socks and COI editors, this essentially promotional page is skirting G11 but in any case refers to a businessperson who signally fails WP:GNG - coverage is advertorial, incidental or ROTM company announcements. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:50, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:50, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

American-Romanian Academy of Arts and Sciences

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

No independent, in-depth coverage warranting an article Bremps... 08:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Isfahan explosion

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

WP:NOTNEWS. Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Iran. XYZ1233212 (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This was internationally reported including by non-typical sources such as MTV. There are multiple stories here which contribute to broad coverage and GNG. One is the industrial disaster, but also the profile of the related corporations and players responsible. Also sources have connected this explosion to the military manufacturing of weaponized drones, and that weapons manufacturing is of international concern beyond typical stories of industrial disaster. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:12, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 05:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SUSTAINED. Only secondary sources contribute to GNG. Wikipedia is not a news aggregator. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 08:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St. Patrick Church (Wyandotte)

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

Apparently non-notable parish church in metro Detroit. The only source provided is an official parish history, which is obviously non-independent. A WP:BEFORE search turns up nothing usable except a local news piece on its 155th anniversary, which is not enough on its own for a WP:GNG pass as a standalone page. Open to a redirect to List_of_churches_in_the_Roman_Catholic_Archdiocese_of_Detroit#South_Region, where it is mentioned, but bringing it to AfD since it has already been draftified and returned to mainspace without improvements, so I didn't think a WP:BLAR was appropriate in that situation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Organizations, Christianity, and Michigan. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found more in a WP:BEFORE search including sources from 1890: [1]. The book Catholic Churches of Detroit (Godzak, 2004) may not quite be SIGCOV, but there's good mention in Irish in Michigan (Metress & Metress, 2006). I stopped searching there. This absolutely needs better sources, I'm not yet convinced it's a keep but if it's not it's not too far off. SportingFlyer T·C 08:15, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the list article recommended by Dclemens1971. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted to allow for further discussion and participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 08:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Return (2001)

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

Searches like "Operation Return" and "Preševo" and similar search terms turn up negligible results, almost exclusively wiki mirrors. This isn't much of a surprise considering this operation consisted of troops essentially walking in unopposed after the Končulj Agreement, and can be described in a few sentences at Insurgency in the Preševo Valley. Fails WP:GNG. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 00:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 00:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Kosovo and Yugoslavia. Shellwood (talk) 09:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Operation happened and it doesn't fail notability. Editor also seems to erase any conflict during Preshevo valley with claims like "ohh small skirmish that happened during small Incurgency" or "oh but this fails notability trust" GazuzBaguzz (talk) 06:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A new account with this comment as its first edit. Hmm. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 13:58, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nominator, a search for the term "Operation Return + 2001" doesn't result in any coverage in sources. More importantly, the article's body fails WP:V as its entirety is cited to one source, the Bujanovac press center, which seems to be a Yugoslav government website that is defunct but archived. There are some links there, but I was not able to find anything that discusses the operation or verifies any of the text. We can presume the information comes from somewhere, but from where, that remains a mystery. --Griboski (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 07:59, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Rommel?" "Gunner Who?"

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

Doesn't meet BOOKCRIT. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 07:58, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Ninoy Aquino International Airport theft incident

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

All the sources are from the time of incident in September 2023 (or curiously before this event from March 2023). Fails WP:EVENT, also WP:NOTNEWS applies. LibStar (talk) 06:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, Aviation, and Philippines. LibStar (talk) 06:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: fails WP:EVENTCRIT #4: Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes [...] are usually not notable. No WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE beyond the initial news cycle. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:52, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anish Shah (Businessman)

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

Business person does business things. None of the refs provide WP:SIGCOV, subject fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, and India. UtherSRG (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:56, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in this article, Anish Shah qualifies under WP:GNG, as he's the CEO of Mahindra group which is in India's top 25 companies. And he has significant coverage in reliable, independent sources as far as I researched after founding this article via Special:Random/Draft.

So I will improve this article asap to follow the Wikipedia:GNG completly. and kindly explain this- Business person does business things so I can know what wrong I did in this so I can improve that also. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the previous CEO of the same company has very old wiki article. Anand Mahindra Just sharing. I know it doesn't matter much. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 15:32, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@IVickyChoudhary: Being connected to a notable entity does not grant notability per WP:INHERIT. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:06, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree that notability is not inherited by association per Wikipedia:INHERIT. However, the argument for keeping this article is not based solely on Anish Shah’s role at Mahindra Group, but on his own notability, which is independently established through. Multiple reliable and independent sources that provide significant coverage of his leadership, strategic decisions, and business vision as Managing Director and CEO of Mahindra Group. Kindly search on Google about him. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 06:31, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References say he's a businessperson doing business things. That's not SIGCOV. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:11, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your review. While I understand the concern that "businessperson doing business things" doesn't automatically imply notability, I respectfully argue that Anish Shah meets the WP:SIGCOV, and WP:GNG.

He has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources such as Forbes India, Economic Times, and Business Today, which profile his leadership, strategic direction, and impact at Mahindra Group. This coverage goes beyond routine job announcements, it reflects independent journalistic interest in Shah as an individual business leader, not merely in the company he leads. His coverage is not trivial, routine, or tied to a single event. I will continue to improve the article by adding more sources that fulfill WP:SIGCOV and will restructure the article to reflect their depth and focus. iVickyChoudhary (talk) 07:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - "Business person does business things" … and on a global scale in ~~Choudhary's~~ Shah's case. Mahindra Group is huge ($23 billion plus). There are Mahindra tractor dealers in farming towns across North America. I'd be stunned if ~~Choudhary~~ Shah isn't notable. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@A. B.: You mean Shah, right? - UtherSRG (talk) 02:10, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ooops! Yes. Thanks. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:14, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it appears many of the significant sources are resume-like or procedural "Shah picked as ..." or fall into the tabloid category "What is Mahindra Group's CEO Anish Shah's monthly salary?" but we don't necessarily get a substantive view of what makes him notable beyond running this company. The most significant pieces are on the business, not him as a person. Not opposed to draftify-ing this so that it could continue to be improved and to eliminate the WP:REFBOMB Nayyn (talk) 23:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nayyn Thank you for the feedback. While I understand the concern regarding routine coverage, I’d respectfully argue that Anish Shah meets the threshold for WP:GNG through sustained, independent, and in-depth coverage.

Articles in Reuters, Economic Times, and Fortune India go beyond procedural appointments. They explore Shah’s leadership in restructuring Mahindra Group ( exit from loss-making units, multi-billion-dollar EV spin-off), his market-shaping role in India's SUV and EV sectors, and his national-level role as President of FICCI. These establish significant coverage focused on him, not just Mahindra as an entity.

And I'm happy to reduce the reference volume to address concerns of WP:REFBOMB iVickyChoudhary (talk) 06:10, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The current sourcing on the article is a bit of a mess and the article reads very promotionally but I think I found 3 sources that are in depth enough to count for GNG.

I think that these should be enough, but I am open to being shown that these sources are not independent enough to confer notability. Moritoriko (talk) 02:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TabPFN

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

Fails WP:PROMO and contains likely AI-generated content (see, for example the bulleted lists of "features" and "limitations"). Several of the sources under "applications" are poorly cited research articles which I am not sure meet the criteria for inclusion and certainly don't meet the criteria for notability. Writing quality and encyclopedic tone throughout. Caleb Stanford (talk) 05:27, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:BEFORE#C, if the issues are content related (as tagged by nom prior to AfD) then the editor should be given some time to develop the article (post talk-page discussion) or article should be edited to fix those issues. If notability is a concern, is nom. saying per WP:DILIGENCE that no sources exist for this AfD (since otherwise AfD may not be the correct procedure)? In my search, I can see secondary sources exist in reliable venues that discuss this topic. WeWake (talk) 17:07, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happy to help! However, the article is quite poor quality at the moment. It would require a substantial rewrite. I’m not an expert in the problem domain so not sure if it meets GNG. Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 22:15, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Caleb Stanford, I have rewritten the article in the meantime. Please take a look if possible. — WeWake (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for redrafting. I will take a look. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WeWake I checked the "The History, Evolution and Future of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM)" source and it does not even mention TabPFN. Can you comment on what happened there?

Do you have a connection to TabPFN? Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:31, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it's unsourced, you're welcome to remove it. I addressed WP:PROSE issues and simply inlined the existing citations within the article. You're welcome to review the history; and I have no connection to the article other than what I am here for - to help create an encyclopedia. I am not sure what warrants this inquiry, but hopefully that helps. WeWake (talk) 16:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:37, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Nature article is referenced in the paper (number 42), however I agree that it's a statement that is more directed towards tabular foundation models in general instead of TabPFN specifically. AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 16:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep: After normal editing, example sources that meet WP:GNG (also easily WP:NSOFTWARE): (a) ICLR Blogposts 2024 – peer-reviewed "post" with editorial oversight published by ICLR from a non-primary source; (b) Nature News&Views – published in the same venue, but a secondary commentary/coverage from a highly reputable source; (c) ~4k stars on GitHub; (d) Fortune (magazine) coverage (considered reliable) by staff AI editor; and (e) TabPFN v1 cited >400 times (meets criteria of significant impact I'd say), and many more. WeWake (talk) 20:21, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nature News&Views looks good. Not sure if ICLR Blogposts is really reliable? I don't think there is a consensus to monitor stars on GitHub for notability for software (see WP:Notability (software)) and, even if so, 4K is really not that many for this purpose. Fortune may be notable according to here. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Caleb Stanford, the blog is peer-reviewed (double-blind) and also a poster actually (here) – without any evidence presented to the contrary, that seems reliable in this context. — WeWake (talk) 17:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would say notability is there according to Wikipedia guidelines: sources 1, 2, 7 and 10 are discussing TabPFN in high detail, including a Nature publication, an ICLR conference paper and a Fortune article. In addition to this, sources 13 (IEEE Sensors Journal), 17 (Journal of Wetlands Research), 18 (NeurIPS), 20 (Digital Health), are research papers solely focused on TabPFN AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 07:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @AlessandrobonettoPL: Notability aside, I just checked all the sources in the "Performance" section and not a single one of them appears to support the claim that was stated in the article. Reference 7 that you mentioned, does not even mention TabPFN. Maybe these are from a previous draft of the article. The primary issue here in my view is quality and possible AI-generated content. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:39, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford, thanks for your input but it seemed you were mostly concerned about notability and now that is not the issue anymore. The reference numbers were updated in the latest edit to the article. The Performance section has been reviewed by an external editor (@WeWake and can be easily revised if needed. Regarding AI-generated content, could you specify any particular sections you'd like to flag? These days, all content can be "possibly AI-generated", so if you have specific concerns we can address them. Also, Wikipedia is a place for every contributor to create the World's best source of information, so if you're not happy with the quality of a text, other than commenting on it you're more than welcome to edit the source and help us distribute this additional piece of knowledge to the world, especially given your valuable expertise in the subject matter :) AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 16:51, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Sure, happy to help. No my concern is not with notability but rather with promotion and article quality, including the references. I’m concerned with how the article was developed given we ended up with a performance section where the citations provided don’t correspond to the claims. I can check the history for who added the section but if you have any ideas… thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford, thanks for contributing to the article! So can you confirm now that the article meets the standards for Wikipedia? Any additional edits required? AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 09:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does not yet. Can you please let me know what happened with the "Performance' section? How did it occur that none of the references provided support the information in the text? Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford, I didn't write that section so I can't say. I will revise it today so you can review it soon AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 07:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Caleb Stanford, I was reviewing the section and thought it would just be better to remove it entirely. Let me know what you think about it AlessandrobonettoPL (talk) 08:28, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Breakfast Time (1957 TV program)

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

Only one independent RS on the page and that is short and barely covers the topic. I don't see sources that suggest this topic meets the notability criteria for inclusion outwith of Wee Willie Webber JMWt (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pennsylvania. JMWt (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Wee Willie Webber. Most coverage of Breakfast Time in publications after the show ended is in biographies of Webber. There are not many good references in this article, but there is ample coverage in newspapers in and around Philadelphia. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 18:38, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable show. Added 4 citations from newspapers WP:NEXIST Lilyonthepond (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per sources added by Lilyonthepond; this should be a section on Wee Willie Webber's page Moritoriko (talk) 02:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per above. The show is notable as an extension of Webber, but notability is not the only question we have to ask in order to answer the question, "Should this article exist on Wikipedia"? In this case, having a separate article only makes it less readable - this entire article could easily be merged in to the Wee Willie Webber biography. See WP:NOPAGE. Flip^and Flopped ㋡ 06:56, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021 Samoan general election

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

Not notable enough for a standalone article. There was only one general election in Samoa in 2021. Although a snap election was planned for May 2021, it was ultimately cancelled and the results of the April 2021 poll were upheld. Details of the planned election are covered in the 2021 Samoan constitutional crisis article. – N Panama 84534 04:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and Oceania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:31, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Astrid Gynnild

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

This is just an awfully self-referential article, created by a WP:SPA, lacking any independent sources, and reading like a resume. BD2412 T 01:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Norway. BD2412 T 01:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non notable. The only sources I can find for this individual are from a university associated with the individual. Nixleovel (talk) 06:42, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. Shellwood (talk) 09:14, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well I wonder. Gynnild seems to be pretty well-published for an academic and I'd have thought easily meets the WP:NACADEMIC criteria for notability. The article is a right mess and has been edited by two SPAs but if it's notable it needs tidying not deletion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:27, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am seeing some articles published and some work leading that one journal, but I am not finding any biographical information, independent or not, that we can cite the information in this WP:BLP to. There is this which is thin on details. I am on the fence right now. Moritoriko (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:41, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an essentially unreferenced BLP, too old to draftify. The external link to her faculty profile sources only her present position, and I suppose if we had evidence of WP:PROF notability we could use it to source a one-line sub-stub about her, but although she has some well-cited works there are not enough to make me willing to advocate for that outcome. The other path to notability would be through WP:AUTHOR and through published reviews of her books, which if they existed should also be usable to replace the unsourced biographical material with content about those books. But all I found was a review of one edited volume (doi:10.18261/ISSN.0805-9535-2018-04-07), not enough for notability that way. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:23, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well you may be right. I found a review of another edited volume so we haven't exhausted the sources of notability here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mwebantu

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

The article does not meet Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline. It lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Most citations are from blogs, press releases, or user-generated content, which do not establish encyclopedic notability. The tone is promotional and may reflect a conflict of interest. Without multiple independent in-depth sources, this article does not warrant a standalone entry. Icem4k (talk) 17:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Companies, Websites, and Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Scholarly sources analyze this media source as a major news source for Zambia, for better or worse. See [2], [3]. The article is in dire need of cleanup but there are fortunately a lot of scholarly sources with which to write a balanced article. Probably the company's marketing team will not like the article that gets written though. Marked with cleanup tags; I may be able to help clean this once the AfD is over. FalconK (talk) 01:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: One academic paper, no matter how well-researched, is not sufficient to demonstrate lasting notability per WP:GNG. There's no mainstream or sustained coverage from reliable, independent secondary sources. Mwebantu is not profiled by any major media outlets, has no significant awards, and no long-term impact demonstrated in third-party sources. Cleanup cannot substitute for notability.--THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that cleanup and notability are orthogonal, but I suspect the desire to delete this article is in large part due to the absolute mess the article is. The sources discussing it, many of which are very critical of its coverage, are considerably more than one single academic paper. I found two after searching for less than 5 minutes. It is also treated in [4], and described in Matambo, E. (2025). Zambia's Youths and the 2021 General Election. I would agree it is marginal and the article would be both completely different from this one and much shorter, but unfortunately this site seems to be a reasonably major part of Zambia's media landscape. FalconK (talk) 22:31, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per sources provided in this discussion. When determining WP:GNG notability, one doesn't even need to look at the content of the article per WP:CONTN. Subject notability is independent of the article.

I will also throw in [5] and [6] for consideration. More sources also likely exist in other languages.

- Ike Lek (talk) 20:09, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MV.Health

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

Very questionable whether it passes WP:NORG. This article is highly promotional with major WP:COI concerns and lacks WP:SUSTAINED notability backed up by WP:RS. Amigao (talk) 02:04, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sexuality and gender, Medicine, England, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:33, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grace Baptist School (Portland, Maine)

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

Kept at AFD in 2008; apparently largely on the then-held basis that all schools are notable. Tagged as unsourced since 2018 and appears to have been generally unsourced since creation aside from linking to the school's website. This is not really significant coverage. There are other such brief descriptions in the newspapers.com archives of the Evening Express, most of which are mainly drawn from interviews with the school's administration. Some minor coverage in this book but I don't think we can base an article meeting WP:NORG for a nonprofict private school based on brief annual newspaper announcements stating that the school had opened for the year and two brief passages in a book stating that the school had strict rules about hairstyles and that a "Let's get rowdy" cheer chant had been suppressed. The 2008 AFD included a reference to sources existing but none were produced. Hog Farm _Talk 05:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Christianity, and Maine. Hog Farm _Talk 05:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The first nomination was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grace Baptist School; in 2013, a few years after that nomination, it was determined that there was no primary topic for "Grace Baptist School", such that this article was renamed and Grace Baptist SchoolGrace Baptist School has pointed to Grace Baptist (then a dab page but now an article) ever since. (I note this for completeness; I have no opinion on the article or its sourcing, potential or otherwise.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I found 5 news articles related to the school's history, but did not find any sources describing its closure. I thin it's worth keeping as a record of an institution that served the community. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 03:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not quite convinced with the sources there. The first is not independent, the second is about the church and only briefly mentions the school, the third is a brief statement that two teachers from the school attended a curriculum screening, and then the remaining three are short pieces without bylines from the local paper, two of which appear to be primarily just restating what the administrator of the school said. If there were an article on the church I think this would be an obvious case for a merger, but there isn't. Hog Farm _Talk 16:43, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tatsuya Morishige

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

Only seven professional appearances in 1995, and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 01:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Svartner (talk) 01:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hirotaka Iida

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

Only one professional appearance in 2002, and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 01:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Svartner (talk) 01:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hiroyuki Takahashi (footballer)

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

Only one professional appearance in 2002, and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 01:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. Svartner (talk) 01:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chinguila

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

Played for Angola national team, but I didn't find any WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 00:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Angola. Svartner (talk) 00:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

McIntyre Road

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

Fails WP:GEOROAD. Sources provided are google maps, government of South Australia which are insufficient for establishing notability. LibStar (talk) 00:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Australia. LibStar (talk) 00:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red Pecorino