Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Arizona

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

Adding a new AfD discussion

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

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

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

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

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

Further information

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

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

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

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Arizona/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Arizona

Allie Bones

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

Delete. There are differences between this subject and Daniel Ruiz II (another governor's chief of staff), but not so substantial we should expect her to warrant a stand-alone, subject specific biography. There is also a lot of puffery such as putting Arizona Assistant Secretary of State in an infobox. Please note that Chad Campbell is covered under NPOL as a state legislator. Mpen320 (talk) 17:10, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Mpen320 (talk) 17:11, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Mpen320 (talk) 17:15, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:05, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- aside from the first one, the rest of the citations seems to lack SIGCOV, while additional online searching seems to emphasize more on the subject's retirement, therefore sustained coverage may also be compromised.Lorraine Crane (talk) 15:52, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All-time Phoenix Rising FC roster

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:LISTN as there is a lack of substantial coverage of this grouping. Let'srun (talk) 03:20, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Football, Lists, and Arizona. Let'srun (talk) 03:20, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:11, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The reason cited by the nom is not the only reason we would keep lists, and this is a valid navigational page similar to ones for other clubs. SportingFlyer T·C 12:09, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What does this list do which a category doesn't? Also, WP:OSE. Let'srun (talk) 20:27, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lists and categories serve different purposes - we can have both per WP:CN - and this list clearly meets WP:LISTPEOPLE. SportingFlyer T·C 22:21, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:32, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per SF, standard type of article. Giant Snowman 19:37, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – USL clubs are sufficient notable for players list. The article needs more sources, but not deletion. Svartner (talk) 23:32, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Keep per discussion of SportingFlyer. Tag with appropriate tags for improvement, but should not be deleted. Demt1298 (talk) 01:04, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Kelly (soccer)

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NATHLETE with a very short career and with nothing saying whether he has retired or not. Since it says he hasn't played in Nine Years, it would be hard to see him play again considering he is 34. Appears to be non notable failing GNG as well. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:33, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Sports, Football, United States of America, Arizona, Illinois, and Missouri. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:33, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This was previously deleted in 2015: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Kelly (soccer) but would likely be ineligible for G4 considering his signing with Arizona United would have been added after deletion, hence it would not have been identical. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:37, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to All-time Phoenix Rising FC roster#K. Fails GNG due to a lack of SIGCOV. While Mr. Kelly has played for other teams besides Arizona United (now known as Phoenix Rising), he has played a majority of his career for this club and his other clubs do not have a roster article. Willing to reconsider if additional coverage is found, so please ping me. Frank Anchor 17:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Don't think redirecting to a single snapshot (In this case team they play for) is the best thing to do. He is also mentioned at 2015 Saint Louis FC season keep in mind. I am aware they are a defunct team, but still. Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:22, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fine with any other redirect target as well, but having multiple suitable targets is not a valid reason to choose neither and delete anyway. Frank Anchor 21:00, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – None of the redirect alternatives seem good enough. Svartner (talk) 19:23, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per the above link seems better than complete deletion. SportingFlyer T·C 12:10, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:31, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:36, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: GNG is not met here, and considering the subject played for at least 4 clubs redirecting this to only one of them doesn't seem like it would be helpful for readers. Let'srun (talk) 20:38, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to All-time Phoenix Rising FC roster: No evidence of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. Demt1298 (talk) 01:07, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to All-time Phoenix Rising FC roster#K – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 06:06, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- lack of enough SIGCOV sources to suggest notability.Lorraine Crane (talk) 17:40, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John W. DenBoer

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

I declined a WP:G4 tag on this, as the article appears to be somewhat different to the previous version deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John DenBoer; additionally, some comments at the previous AfD gave the impression this was a "not yet" instead of "not ever". However, other comments suggested this was a BLP nightmare. So, I think a fresh discussion is best. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:58, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:58, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – This article should be deleted because most of the sources are self-written research papers or interviews/profile pieces and there is 'no independent news or in-depth coverage' showing that John W. DenBoer is notable. The Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners issued a 'Cease & Desist Order' against him for representing himself as a licensed psychologist after his license was revoked: Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners – Cease & Desist Order, which raises questions about credibility. This article is basically a 'recreation' of a previously deleted page (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John_DenBoer, deleted 1 Nov 2022) and does 'not provide any independent coverage'. All the sources seem user-generated or paid. Therefore, it does 'not meet Wikipedia's notability rules' (WP:GNG) and should be deleted. — Evaowen (talk) 11:17, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and speedy close per WP:SNOW. First of all, this is a notable physician who has valid academic citations. He is also featured in a documentary film and has a TEDx talk. There are plenty of physicians with this level of notability who have absolutely no problems at all staying on Wikipedia, but DenBoer is being intentionally singled out because some angry people out there really dislike him.

Secondly, Evaowen popped out of nowhere to try to get the article deleted. Wikipedia has policies against libel, smear campaigns, and people trying to get articles deleted because of personal agendas and vendettas. This is absolutely uncalled for and has no place on Wikipedia.

Thirdly, archived versions of John DenBoer show that the article looked overly promotional and wasn't suitable as encyclopedic content at the time (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John DenBoer), but now it's been written from scratch again with multiple reliable sources, and the subject also has gained a lot.

Speedy keep, speedy close, and stop the nonsense. Jayyoungiscool (talk) 15:33, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayyoungiscool Please keep the discussion focused on content and sourcing, not editors. AfD decisions are based on verifiable, independent, and reliable sources, not opinions.The WP:SNOW argument is not valid here — this is an active AfD discussion with differing views.

So far, no such sources have been presented. TEDx talks, self-published research, or affiliated documentaries do not establish notability under WP:GNG or WP:BLP.

Your comments appear strongly biased toward keeping the article regardless of sourcing, which gives the impression of a conflict of interest. If you believe the subject is notable, please provide independent, in-depth coverage from reputable publications.Evaowen (talk) 17:59, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, Medicine, Psychology, Sports, Arizona, Massachusetts, and Montana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:53, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; redirection to the film is possible alternative to deletion. Little sign of NPROF. Lots of sources, mostly from somewhat junky outlets (per WP:RSP). The coverage all seems to be closely tied to the This is Dementia film, which might be notable -- covered by MarketWatch, among less reliable sources. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 18:16, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tarn Weir

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

I could not find WP:SIGCOV from independent sources to establish WP:GNG. The closest I found was this article from the Tucson Sentinel, but that is more of an overview of a single game and did not go in-depth into Weir. Raskuly (talk) 14:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Greece, England, Arizona, and California. Raskuly (talk) 14:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SIGCOV so fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:11, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SIGCOV, I didn’t find any significant coverage. Morekar (talk) 15:11, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asymmetric Publications

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH; notability is not inherited from Kingdom of Loathing or its other spinoffs. I do think Zack Johnson is probably notable per WP:NARTIST, but not the studio, and therefore the page itself would likely require a total rewrite. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:09, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Arizona. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:09, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zack Johnson is the founder of the company, so it appears WP:SURMOUNTABLE. IgelRM (talk) 16:02, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, I support the total rewrite but if that doesn't work out a redirect to Kingdom of Loathing will do. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:21, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what Zack Johnson being the founder has to do with it, notability is not inherited. I have no prejudice towards a separate article being made about Johnson if notability can be shown, but this is separate unless you are proposing to move and rewrite as a Zack Johnson bio page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:20, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more votes, so far only one (weak) !keep vote
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kingdom of Loathing per WP:ATD. No significant coverage of the company itself. --Mika1h (talk) 00:00, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arizona Proposed deletions