Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Europe

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Europe. 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|Europe|~~~~}} 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 Europe. 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.

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

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Europe/archive

Purge page cache

watch

General

Democracy Movement (Iceland)

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

Looking through sources that I was able to find online, I did see brief mentions of the party, mostly on visir.is, but did not find any sources that would convice me that the party has received significant coverage in independent sources. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Europe, and Iceland. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirecet to Ástþór Magnússon Wium. Geschichte (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Men.com

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

This porn site is not notable under any criteria. It is not covered by any news sources and hardly even mentioned by Aylo themselves. Most of this article is just Men.com releases video, generates controversy or fame. The article's citations are also generally unreliable and not independent of the subject. Most of the websites are gay porn sites or LGBT forums which are not reliable and the gay porn websites could have been paid for a biased review given Aylo's power.

Note: I tried to PROD the article but an IP editor contested it. Now that I am unblocked I will move it to AFD. DotesConks (talk) 01:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Film, Organizations, and Europe. DotesConks (talk) 01:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sexuality and gender, and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable gay porn site that also sounds like a toxic masculinity forum. An editor from Mars (talk) 08:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep And I would admonish editors to at least look at the references section of an article before calling a subject non-notable. There is WP:SIGCOV from Pink News, Queerty and several other LGBTQ+ publications currently in the article. The claim by the nominator that this website was not covered by news sources is factually incorrect. Simonm223 (talk) 12:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pink News is the only one listed as a RS by Cite Highlighter, the others are yellow, so of marginal notability. We basically have one good RS and several iffy ones. Oaktree b (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be honest I'm not familiar with Cite Highlighter - I'm assuming it's a plugin - but it's giving you incorrect information. Queerty does not appear at WP:RSP and as such it is not "of marginal notability" nor is it an iffy RS. Merely one that hasn't had regular discussion at RS/N.Simonm223 (talk) 14:52, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore if your Cite Highlighter is calling CNN, Slate and Buzzfeed news of questionable reliability I'd question its usefulness as a tool. Simonm223 (talk) 14:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
CNN is archived so it won't pick it up. The first three sources aren't directly about men.com, only briefly mentioning it. Queerly isn't a sourced used in the article. QueerMeNow isn't a RS.So, as I said, we only have one RS that is directly about this, the rest tangentially mention it. We still don't have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You misspelled Queerty which is why you missed it. It's Reference 15 presently. Look again. Simonm223 (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it looks reliable, barely half a page of text. Not super extensive coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 11:48, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Just not enough RS that talk about this at length. As my prior comment said, we only have brief mentions. Oaktree b (talk) 23:04, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Astronet

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability/importance still seems low. No useful references to support most content on this page. Redirecting wouldn't be a bad idea. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:38, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Astronomy, and Europe. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: a cursory check for references turned up a number of papers on the subject. It appears sufficiently notable, and I'm not clear that WP:BEFORE was followed. Praemonitus (talk) 05:06, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article now cites multiple sources including Science (2007, 2009, 2011) and Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (2013), all WP:RS, offering WP:SIGCOV of Astronet and satisfying WP:GNG. A JSTOR search provides good coverage, and as another editor has already noted, it's unclear whether WP:BEFORE was properly followed. HerBauhaus (talk) 12:24, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Of course this is a keep please Best Regards (CP) 21:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Over the past few days, I’ve added 8–9 WP:RS sources from Science, Nature, the Royal Astronomical Society, Springer, and others. Promotional and unsourced content has been removed. The article is no longer a stub supported by only 1 or 2 sources and it now clearly passes WP:GNG. HerBauhaus (talk) 10:24, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the recently made improvements and a good state of sources. Such initiatives may have usually sources not easily searchable online. - Norlk (talk) 12:43, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

U-15 European Baseball Championship

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Same rationale as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/U-12 European Baseball Championship and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006 European Juveniles Baseball Championship. No indication of notability. Fails to meet WP:SPORTSEVENT, WP:GNG. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:59, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, Baseball, and Europe. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:59, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beehype

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

I can't find any in-depth coverage of this magazine. Lots of mentions, it exists, but I can't find anything that would indicate it passes WP:GNG. If others can, and it is eventually kept, it does not need the dab in the title. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:09, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Websites, and Europe. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In case this article is kept, Please move the article to Beehype (redirect to itself). Current title includes unnessesary disambiguation. Thanks and no opinion on the AFD itself. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 13:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The article has now been moved (mid-AfD). Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The Oxford Handbook of Social Media and Music Learning refers to it as a source of info on emerging musicians and bands in Poland [1]. That's a book from a very reputable publisher using it as a source. Apart from that, I'm still searching for Beehype -honey, as it's also the name of at least one brand of honey. RebeccaGreen (talk) 17:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Country-specific

Albania

Lefter Koxhaj

AfDs for this article:

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

The article has been deleted two times before for lack of notability. There is still a lack of significant and in-depth coverage about the subject. Sources mostly mention him in relation with one event - the 2001 Skopje police raid. Wikipedia is not a memorial, so I think this recreation should stop. StephenMacky1 (talk) 10:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Albania, and North Macedonia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 10:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Same as the last two AfD, this isn't a notable person. I'm not even sure it would warrant a mention in the National Liberation Army article. Appears as a memorial, but the person has been gone for 20 yrs, if nothing's come up for notable/reliable sources in that time, I doubt much more will. Oaktree b (talk) 14:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete: The notability is proven by several sources. Even though the sources mostly mention him in relation with the 2001 Skopje police raid, he also participated in numerous battles (Insurgency in the Preshevo Valley, Battle of Slupčane, Lipkovo crisis,Battle of Matejče and Aračinovo crisis). He was one of the most prominent NLA commanders without any doubt which is proven by sources like the North Macedonian Civil Media or Tetova Sot. Furthermore there is the source of Radio Kosova e Lire which describes his early life and involvement in the Insurgency in the Preshevo Valley and 2001 insurgency in Macedonia.

Mitrovica02 (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and WP:SALT. Still fails WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 08:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Emiljano Shehaj

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

Fails WP:SPORTCRIT, only played 208 minutes in Albania’s highest football league. Fails WP:GNG, I could only find these WP:ROUTINE announcements [2] [3] Geschichte (talk) 15:19, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Albania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:55, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 17:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ermal Sako

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

Fails WP:SPORTCRIT, only played 208 minutes in Albania’s highest football league. Fails WP:GNG, I could only find this WP:PASSING mention [4] and this brief interview. [5] Geschichte (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Albania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:54, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 17:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kastrati Group Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MBM Port

Others

Andorra

New alerts are automatically placed here, this page is kept as a historic reference.

Articles for deletion

Armenian violence in the Ottoman Empire

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

This is blatant propaganda that utilizes almost exclusively Turkish government or gov-linked or denialist sources in order to "counter" to the Armenian Genocide "claims" as Turkey sees it. --Երևանցի ^talk 16:24, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Armenia, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 16:29, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT; from the very first sentence written to push a propaganda narrative, as described in our Featured Article Armenian genocide denial. "There was no genocide, and if there was the Armenians were to blame" in Wikipedia article form. The article creator should be up for a CTOPIC TBAN for this intentional disinformation. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Arguments provided by OP and the user above do not meet WP:DEL-REASON. This article is based on a wide array of scholarly, academic sources from English, Turkish and even German. WP:BIASEDSOURCES guideline allows partisan sources as long as they are used properly. Even if we were to assume that an article is biased, this is not a valid reason to delete it. The proper action to take is to determine why it is biased and fix the errors. Furthermore, contrary to what has been suggested by others, this article does not in any way claim that there was no Armenian genocide, just like Palestinian political violence does not negate the existence of Gaza genocide.--Wallis sabiti (talk) 17:47, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your article was already deleted several times for similar reasons. You engage in POV pushing, which is against wikipedia rules. It is not the first time I see you doing this. Athoremmes (talk) 17:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You support the Treaty of Sevres and revisionist United Armenia project on your user page. You are the real POV pusher. Wallis sabiti (talk) 18:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good for me, how that relates to topic discussed? I published it on my personal page, not on mainspace, you are free to do it as well. Athoremmes (talk) 00:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete , it was already discussed in previous AfD, the article is written in vague language, sources are biased, etc Athoremmes (talk) 17:53, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BIASEDSOURCES are allowed. Wallis sabiti (talk) 18:05, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These aren't just biased sources, they're unreliable. The Turkish article was deleted a few days ago. tr:Ermenilerce_Türklere_yapılan_katliamlar. ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:23, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That article was deleted because there was already an article for the Armenian rebellions, the log states on Trwiki. If you think sources are unreliable, you should take this to WP:RSN. Wallis sabiti (talk) 18:30, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And why is that? Because mainstream scholarship does not recognize "Armenian violence in the Ottoman Empire" as a thing. It's nothing but cheap propaganda. ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Type "Armenian terrorism" on Google scholar and you will see how scholarship recognizes it. Wallis sabiti (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Armenian terrorism" ≠ "organized massacres of Turks by Armenian revolutionaries", let alone of 518,105. ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From 1910 to 1922, Armenian bandits had killed 523,955 Ottoman Muslims.^[1] (p. 92) Wallis sabiti (talk) 19:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, per "International Law Expert" Sadi ÇAYCI in the "Review of Armenian Studies" with a reference to the "State Archives of the Turkish Prime Ministry". sounds as reliable as it can possibly get. ----Երևանցի ^talk 19:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What previous AfDs? This is the first one with this title so they must be under some other title. Nil Einne (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nil Einne The first version of the article was called "Armenian atrocities", see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armenian atrocities. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:27, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Heads up Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zenzyyx. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on WP:TNT grounds. I have no doubt that the article does make reference to some notable atrocities, but the article would require a tremendous amount of reworking and in-depth verification of the sources in order to correct the intense NPOV issues. Flip^and Flopped ツ 01:28, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Over reliance on Turkish government sources which violates NPOV. (Cont.) reference: Harbord, James G. (1920). Conditions in the Near East. Report of the American military mission to Armenia, page 35 is a misrepresentation since it doesn't properly cite where this information originated(page 37, Moustapha Kemal Pasha). So an Ottoman/Turkish source disguised as an unbiased "Western" source. --Kansas Bear 01:31, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and rationale provided. Major bias and non-neutral sourcing. Archives908 (talk) 16:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ “TERRORISM AND ASYMMETRIC THREAT: ACTIVITIES AGAINST TURKEY, FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE 20th CENTURY TO THE PRESENT (Armenian Terror Activities and PKK Terror Organization Activities since 1915)”. Review of Armenian Studies, no. 18 (May 2008): 89-99.

Delete - this is genocide denialism, sock puppetry, and Soapboxing at its worst - and at the worst possible time, when billionaires are trying to play gotcha with us so that they can take away our charitable status. Bearian (talk) 03:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as per nom and others. Let’s be honest, this is one of the best state-sponsored efforts on Wikipedia. Charlie (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:FRINGE full of genocide denial. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 02:07, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Julia Lebedeva

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

Fails WP:NSKATE. Fails WP:GNG. No evidence of notability. On-line searches yielded nothing. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, Armenia, and Russia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 21:29, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Armenia at the 2002 Winter Olympics: Both this and the corresponding Russian article are devoid of any type of secondary coverage. As such, the subject does not appear to meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Redirect as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 21:36, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She was actually quite famous. But my brief search didn't come with anything. (Understandably, cause 20 years have passed.)
I wouldn't delete articles like this. Cause you would need to find Russian and Armenian print papers from 97–02, they haven't been scanned for Google Books.
I've looked her up, she currently coaches very small kids in Moscow. Her students are so small, none of them are in the news, sadly. --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:47, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bordrline notable Olympic sportsman. Independent coverage does exist, but difficult to find. --Altenmann >talk 16:32, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notable how? Finishing in 27th place out of 27 skaters? Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:39, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's why she dropped competitive sport, sad. Still borderline WP:GNG/WP:SIGCOV. --Altenmann >talk 17:03, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is that "significant coverage" in the room with us now? Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:38, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I can see, Altenmann found her entry on Sport-strana.ru, a Russian online sports encyclopedia. There's a detailed article.
The Sport Strana encyclopedia may not seem well-designed (it is stuck somewhere in the 2000s), but it is being used in 590 Russian Wikipedia articles ([6]). So it is definitely a serious, reliable website. And their article about Lebedeva is actually well-written and looks good. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She represented Armenia at the Olympics and the Europeans, basically being an "acting" Armenian champion. (I have no idea if actual Armenian national championships were held at that time. So I can't prove she was actually a champion and thus passes WP:NSKATE.)
And she wasn't someone unknown even in Russia. She placed 6th at the Russian championships in the 1997/98 season and thus most probably qualified for the Russian national squad. Cause she represented Russia at the Golden Spin and Skate Israel early in the next season. --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. All that said, I think she passes WP:NSKATE as a de facto Armenian champion. (At least de facto.)
@Altenmann:. I was afraid to vote because of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1176#User:Bgsu98 mass-nominating articles for deletion and violating WP:BEFORE. Where the emphasis of the discussion I started was shifted to attacking me. Since then, I've been avoiding AfD and decided to come here only because I know Lebedeva was famous enough. As were many other Russian skaters whose article were deleted during the past year. --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A similar mop-up was earlier for footballers and ... pornstars. There was even a joke inforgaphics where, like, 55% of Wikipedia articles were pornstars, 25% pokemon :-). It is sad that now it seems to be 80% of Wikipedia edits is from wikignomes (that's what I see in my watchlist) rather than content creators. But there is a reasonable position that if a person is indeed notable to general public, not just to wikipedia lawyers, the bio will be recteated anyway ... or not. My personal approach is if I see some name mentioned an several wp articles, I write up a brief bio, such as Shulamit Volkov or Niyameddin Musayev or Bronislava Kerbelytė, to name a few of my articles no one cares about. --Altenmann >talk 18:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Of course Bgsu98 comes down as a 25-pound hammer on all these articles, but in his defense I may say that a HUGE number of nanostubs were created by dumping various databases into wp, without real loving care of the subjects. I remember this happened to locations in Antarctica (it took lots of work to merge/redirect them into larger features) ; we are still struggling with GNIS dumps of locations which do not exist anywhere but in GNIS; I remember one guy ctearted several dozens 200-character articles on railway stations in several minutes, I guess in a rat race to be the one to create the 1,000,000th Wikipedia article. And so on. So I see nothing wrong in backfiring with massive AfD nominations. --Altenmann >talk 18:19, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But these figure skater articles were not like that. Many were well-developed. There were several prominent editors who created such articles a few years ago. Maybe if these people were still active they would defend their creations.
This is a lesson why you need to write articles for contemporary skaters now and not wait 20 years. Cause in 20 years most of the online sources won't exist anymore, and it will be impossible to prove the people were famous once. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:33, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have added sources to this article. This is the English-language Wikipedia, so sources in languages other than English must include 1) the title translated into English, and b) the language of the source. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:51, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Must include". — That's not a requirement. --Moscow Connection (talk) 23:45, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even when those articles were improved (I improved some of the mass AfD summitted skating bio articles after submission and they were properly cited before the nomination) they still draw attention of the nominator for deletion due to the narrow view of what is considered "notable". That said I'm not sure how these deletions makes a better Wikipedia. The nominator's assertion "No evidence of notability. On-line searches yielded nothing." is inaccurate as sources have been added to the article that are appropriate and as a national champion she passes WP:NSKATE. Nayyn (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Armenia at the 2002 Winter Olympics. Not much coverage to keep as stand alone article. Ramos1990 (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems she passes WP:NSKATE as a champion. Archives908 (talk) 17:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Champion of what?!? Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:53, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Austria

Richard Medhurst

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

Near zero independent third-party WP:RSes - article is substantially sourced to self-sources and non-RSes that are not sufficient for a WP:BLP. There are a couple of RSes, but that would make this a WP:BLP1E. No evidence here that this article meeds WP:NJOURNALIST or WP:GNG. A quick WP:BEFORE did not turn up third-party RS coverage that would meet the requirements of the WP:BLP policy. I'd be happy to be shown wrong, but it would need to be shown. PROD removed but without fixing the referencing issue - David Gerard (talk) 23:37, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 23:37, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 23:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 23:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am the one who deprodded the page and I had added 3 sources including articles from Kronen Zeitung (02/25) & The Times of Israel (08/24). This was clearly not a PRODable article.... MUCH more exists. What single event? His arrest in Heathrow in August 2024? part of the coverage is about it. (a lot) https://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/international/europe/artc-un-commentateur-politique-britannique-anti-israelien-detenu-a-l-aeroport-de-heathrow https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/-trying-to-make-an-example-out-of-me-british-journalist-fears-uk-using-his-arrest-to-silence-dissent/3314071 etc etc Not all. Other arrests, other events are also covered in a variety of languages and sources: https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2025/02/07/richard-medhurst-austria/ https://brusselssignal.eu/2025/02/austrian-security-agents-raid-home-of-british-activist-over-alleged-hamas-membership/ https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/journalist-richard-medhurst-detained-in-austria-after-police https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-805467 etc, etc. Most of all, all sources (hostile, favourable or neutral) present him as a well-known critic of Israel/defender of the Palestinian cause. -Mushy Yank. 00:00, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Discrimination, Law, Israel, Palestine, and Austria. -Mushy Yank. 00:01, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: then. -Mushy Yank. 00:02, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: many good references and many eventsMwinog2777 (talk) 17:55, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The references are all primary and very few third-party except the WP:BLP1E? What to your mind are the three best references? - David Gerard (talk) 07:32, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This person's page should stay, there are enough reliable coverage and paases the WP:NBIO SATavr (talk) 17:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, though it is a bit of a mix, and I think some of these sources like the "Palestine Chronicle" may be unreliable and therefore not help with notability, on the net, there are other sources such as Times of Israel, Fox, and others, that could be enough to establish a baseline of notability here. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Johannes Heinrich of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

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

The article's significance is not shown. He was born after the overthrow of the monarchy and was never a prince. The article mainly shows genealogical information. RobertVikman ^Discussion 15:27, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Austria. Shellwood (talk) 15:37, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't find much significant coverage from a cursory search, just ancestry pages D1551D3N7 (talk) 18:13, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Austria Billie Jean King Cup team

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

Article appears to undergo regular edits with no WP:RS, Suggest merging content with Billie Jean King Cup which already contains details about the competitors. Variety312 (talk) 22:11, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Tennis, and Austria. Variety312 (talk) 22:11, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:13, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is no deletion rationale presented above. Was a WP:BEFORE search performed? Also, the suggested merge target is completely inappropriate. Billie Jean King Cup is the article that contains all the high level information about the competition from its founding as the Federation Cup to the present day, and currently has 0 mention of this particular team (and also has 0 depth of any other team at the level this article goes in to). AfD isn't supposed to be used to propose bad merges or as a time pressured source finding/article improvement tool. Iffy★Chat -- 16:37, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a notable Billie Jean King Cup team so why on earth would we delete it? Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:14, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:25, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have found no sources indicating the Austria team for the Fed cup/Billie Jean King cup is or has been notable. There is routine coverage of their results from certain years, but I have not found anything else. Merely claiming it is a notable BJK team does not make it so, there needs to be sources to meet general notability.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 00:12, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, you asked for sources, here's some: [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]. Is that enough for you? Iffy★Chat -- 10:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None of these sources seem to be more than coverage of the team's results or their hopes for the Fed Cup/BJK cup. In my opinion, these would fall under routine coverage as it's pretty common for teams/players to be interviewed before, during, and after tournaments. I don't think these sources establish notability per WP:NSPORT or WP:ROUTINE. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 22:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is what you're going to get for sports teams. If there's consistent year round coverage of their performance/team composition, that should go towards notability. I'd struggle to find many sources even for Austria national football team that wouldn't meet some definition of routine. Jevansen (talk) 23:02, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article has been here since 2007. Should have some sources by now showing wider coverage. Ramos1990 (talk) 21:11, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
More sources: [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] - The fact that the sources aren't currently in the article isn't a basis for deletion. It's an reason to improve the article. Iffy★Chat -- 21:57, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 00:27, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Azerbaijan

Belgium

Mademoiselle Boop

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

Does not meet GNG or ANYBIO. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 23:57, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Entertainment. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 23:57, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Belgium. Shellwood (talk) 00:32, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per ENTERTAINER and expand based on the French Wikipedia entry. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:28, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:15, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I agree with Another Believer that this article can be kept and expanded based on the French version. I don't have the cultural knowledge to fully understand whether this passes GNG/ANYBIO, but in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE I think this article can be improved from existing French sources rather than deleted at this time.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 01:47, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The subject meets WP:ENT as a notable performer with coverage in local media and presence in French-language sources. Article can be improved by translating and expanding from the French Wikipedia. Enough basis to preserve and develop instead of delete. Pridemanty (talk) 06:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Susan (drag queen)

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

Does not meet notability criteria. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 00:00, 5 April 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 April 5. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:19, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Belgium. Shellwood (talk) 00:31, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:36, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. No notability demonstrated in the present sources. Svartner (talk) 08:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Arguably passes WP:CREATIVE because of an international tour. Bearian (talk) 14:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which part of WP:CREATIVE? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 16:15, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:12, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radio in the Flemish Community

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

The subject of this article fails WP:GNG. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Netherlands. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This type of article is very common. To link a few: Radio in France, Radio in Germany, Radio in Austria and Radio in the Republic of Ireland. Concerning the notability of the Flemish Community: since Belgium is roughly split into two language regions, each region has its own set of radio stations. AllOriginalBubs (talk) 15:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AllOriginalBubs, the examples are from primary level national units. Do you claim that this level should be skipped in Belgium? gidonb (talk) 03:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:50, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mass media in Belgium#Radio as an ATD for an unjustified spinoff. Not sure that any of the information is missing there yet access and history would be preserved. gidonb (talk) 09:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A quick search of Google Books shows the following English-language sources: Who Owns the World's Media? Media Concentration and Ownership Around the World (Oxford University Press) [22], pages 42-43; Media Compass: A Companion to International Media Landscapes (Wiley) [23], pages 22-23; The Media in Europe: The Euromedia Handbook (SAGE Publications) [24], pages 21-23. I'm sure there's more, in English and in other languages. If there were an article on Radio in Belgium, equivalent to Television in Belgium, it might be appropriate to merge this article there - but I don't think that merging or redirecting to Mass media in Belgium, which covers radio, tv, press, would be appropriate. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:33, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:12, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Bulgaria

Nexcom Bulgaria

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

should be deleted due to concerns regarding its overall notability, lack of extensive coverage in independent sources, and the potential for promotional language that undermines its informational value. Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 09:06, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 09:06, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete. subject does not meet WP:ORGCRIT and article is near entirely uncited aside from the only citation, which references one of the endless number of websites that collate basic info on businesses. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty nine (talk) 11:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Internet, and Bulgaria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zadarma

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

The article was full of brand content references. Without these citations, no reliable reference was found on the Internet about this company. Please note that the same article was created in French and Spanish by a single-purpose account. Thanks, Framawiki (please notify me when you reply) 18:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Thanks, Framawiki (please notify me when you reply) 18:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Bulgaria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of sources to establish WP:NCORP. Mekomo (talk) 07:35, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment article may still be saved, as I found more potential RS especially in the Spanish version of the same article which has much more cited sources, though still reviewing some of these for RS checks. Villkomoses (talk) 14:30, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after a bit more review into this, seems even the France version citations seems not enough to save article.Villkomoses (talk) 14:14, 10 April 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 delete‎. ✗plicit 12:06, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdan Stoyanov

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

I'm having a hard time even verifying his birthdate, Soccerway doesn't have it: [25]. Looks like he made 20 professional appearances at best. The only coverage I could find specifically about him, outside databases, is this very short article with quotes. Other articles are passing mentions like match reports but no WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. Robby.is.on (talk) 10:19, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Robby.is.on (talk) 10:19, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:32, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable and even problems with WP:V. Geschichte (talk) 14:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 22:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 11:36, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:40, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Others

Croatia

Krešimir Luetić

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

Croatian men's footballer who spent his entire career in lower levels without evidence of meeting WP:GNG. Two secondary sources I found were Dalmatinski Nogomet articles from 2022 and 2024, both of which are passing mentions. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Croatia. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 12:30, 12 April 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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:57, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Snovi

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

Snovi is a Croatian band. The page relies solely on self-published sources (Facebook page, Bandcamp) and doesn't have any reliable independent sources. Based on WP:Band. Google News don't show anything related to Snovi. Other wikis don't have a page for Snovi. LastJabberwocky (talk) 14:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. LastJabberwocky (talk) 14:39, 28 March 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 March 28. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing found in Gnews. Gsearch only brings up bandcamp, youtube an their website. Sourcing now in the article is non-RS as the nom states. Not meeting musical notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:01, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:36, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Croatia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:39, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, all cited sources are deprecated and before search did not show anything close to meeting notability criteria. Mekomo (talk) 14:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Others

Czech Republic

Galaksia Praha 23

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

Self-promotion of an amateur club, without coverage by independent sources. The only sources cited are the club and amateur league websites, Facebook, and a promotional article by the advertising agency Prague Morning. FromCzech (talk) 09:22, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 09:22, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft I would have moved this to draft space instead of AfD, some news coverage, but it feels somewhat routine. Govvy (talk) 10:48, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see much room for improvement, but if there is a consensus for the draft... FromCzech (talk) 12:05, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Falls in WP:PROMO. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:27, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 12:00, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 12:03, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 12:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Denmark

UCPH Department of Chemistry

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

Fails WP:GNG. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:49, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Denmark. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:49, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaning towards keep just because this is such an old department and has the start of what looks to be a verifiable history - I just can't find it because I don't know any Danish and have to rely on Google Translate to find anything useful. If no one else can find information about it (the other departments also pretty heavily rely on primary sources, though they are in general better sourced) then it would probably be best to merge to University of Copenhagen Faculty of Science. Recon rabbit 15:01, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:41, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's tricky, but there are indications that there's enough in histories of Hans Christian Ørsted and in the quincentennial history of the University published in 1978 (and apparently held in the Rigsarkivet) to cover the history of the Chemistry institute specifically. It will need to be carefully teased apart from the history of chemistry at the Technical University of Denmark, which also involved Ørsted and some of which is apparently shared. Uncle G (talk) 00:44, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Proposed deletions

Estonia

Others

Finland

Villilä studios

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

The article not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for companies or studios. Kopnakolicti (talk) 07:18, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Kopnakolicti (talk) 07:18, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Finland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rightware

AfDs for this article:

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

lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources, failing Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Additionally, if the content relies on self-published sources, appears promotional, or does not demonstrate a lasting impact Welcome to Pandora (talk) 07:45, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Welcome to Pandora (talk) 07:45, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Finland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oppose due to inaccurate nomination this article needs to be updated and there is missing information, but it is not fair to say that it should be deleted because it is not notable and relies on promotional material or self published sources when the sources used are TechCrunch, VentureBeat, etc. There are some self published sources that could be removed, and could have been removed by the nominator faster than creating this AfD. At the same time there are plenty of other RS that could be added to enhance the article and improve it such as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 which all support that this firm is notable according to WP:NCORP Nayyn (talk) 13:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

France

Pascal Michon

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

While accomplished, I can't find any in-depth coverage of him, and while there is another person with this name who is widely referenced, this person is not, and I can't find anything to show that he passes WP:NSCHOLAR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:34, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:34, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, History, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Searching only JSTOR found ten reviews of four books, now added to the article. Probably there are more elsewhere. This is enough for a pass of WP:AUTHOR, and (since they are in-depth publications by others about his work) for WP:GNG as well. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY after good work by David Eppstein to find and add sources. Bearian (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY and my commendations to David. Flip^and Flopped ツ 21:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A similar discussion took place in 2013 for the French Pascal Michon page, and it was ultimately decided to keep it.– Yasunarisan 19:04, 12 April 2025 (UTC +9)

Others

Georgia

1982 Sukhumi Dranda Airport runway collision

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

Article has only primary (database) sourcing, and I could not find any significant coverage from a basic BEFORE search. The article has been tagged for reliance on a single source and not meeting GNG since August of last year, and no real improvements have been forthcoming. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Russia. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:28, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Sukhumi Babushara Airport. I searched Russian sources, but no one mentions it even the history page on the official airport website. Sadly, doesn't know a good Russian database to make a perfectly throurough research. LastJabberwocky (talk) 06:44, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Sukhumi Babushara Airport as an alternative to deletion per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT – Other than databases, there exists no reliable secondary sources that provide significant or in-depth coverage of the event nor are there any demonstrated lasting effects nor long-term impacts on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. This was the best I managed to find but isn't significant coverage of the collision:
Спустя три года, 14 августа 1982 года, в Сухумском аэропорту самолет Jet L-410 столкнулся на взлетно-посадочной полосе с Ту-134А. В авиаинциденте погибли все, кто находился в «Турболете» - 9 пассажиров и два члена экипажа.
[Three years later, on August 14, 1982, at the Sukhumi airport, a Jet L-410 collided with a Tu-134A on the runway. The incident killed everyone on board the Turbolet - nine passengers and two crew members.]
Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:04, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

Germany

Blutonium Boy

AfDs for this article:

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

Blutonium is German DJ. The article was nominated for deletion in 2008 and kept based on this source, which seems notable but doesn't have WP:SIGCOV. The other sources I found are: [26], [27], [28]. This self-published book mentions him in a list of hardstyle djs. German Music Archive doesn't give anything. It feels notable but notable sources couldn't be found. LastJabberwocky (talk) 15:32, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Germany. LastJabberwocky (talk) 15:32, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rainer Strecker

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

I was unable to find significant coverage about this German actor. His name appears in many movie databases, but that is not enough to establish notability. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Germany. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Deletion unnecessary Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why? WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 17:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WhoIsCentreLeft It is kind of a waste of time, or IDK. Just not a big issue. And this article clearly isn't a case of Vandalism Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WhoIsCentreLeft Wikipedia can survive with articles on Non Notable People if it is written in a NPOV Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:24, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are very wrong... According to rules of Wikipedia, if an article fails WP:GNG, it must be deleted, even if its not vandalism or written in neutral tone. Also, non-notable and unsourced articles like this decrease the quality of Wikipedia. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WhoIsCentreLeft Two Questions. One, isn't this just a guidline? It does say on Wikipedia:Notability These guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do notlimit the content of an article or list, though notability is commonly used as an inclusion criterion for lists (for example for listing out a school's alumni). For Wikipedia's policies regarding content, see Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Wikipedia is not, and Biographies of living persons. Second, how does it decrease the quality of Wikipedia? Servite et contribuere (talk) 19:29, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:DEL, articles that fail notability guidelines are subject to deletion. This article violates Wikipedia policy so it should be deleted. Keeping articles that violate Wikipedia's policy definitely harms its quality. I hope you understand. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 20:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WhoIsCentreLeft I understand the policies, but I was asking about the point of the policies on notability Servite et contribuere (talk) 23:39, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WhoIsCentreLeft I don't think this: "Reasons for deletion include, but are not limited to, the following (subject to the condition that improvement or deletion of an offending section, if practical, is preferable to deletion of an entire page):" specifically says "It must be deleted". What does? Servite et contribuere (talk) 23:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom: also could not find reliable sources discussing the subject. /over.throws/^✎ 17:45, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Added audiobook work and references which brings the article inside WP:GNG. Inwind (talk) 20:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's additional material in the German Wikipedia as well. I tagged it for that purpose. --Jahaza (talk) 21:19, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmic (Thomas Anders album)

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

Doesn't meet WP:NALBUM and lacks significant coverage from reliable sources. Frost 12:32, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:48, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Walter Demmelhuber

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

For someone with such a long list of research publications, I would have expected a higher citation count than 65. Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG, and I don't see that they pass WP:NSCHOLAR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:41, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:41, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:55, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:10, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see any possible case for WP:NPROF notability — the subject is a guest professor with just 65 total citations and doesn't have any other research activity as far as I can tell. I also couldn't find any coverage of his business career outside of press releases about his board memberships, so I don't see any case for WP:GNG. MCE89 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bass-T

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

Does not appear to meet WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG based on a WP:BEFORE search. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:11, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:11, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the subject does appear to have an extensive catalogue of releases. Out of these, three singles do appear to have had impact on national charts: Germany and Austria. ResonantDis_tortion 19:01, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Currently lacks sufficient citations from reliable, independent sources to fully establish his notability. RolandSimon (talk) 04:28, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: In addition to the charts the page has another good source, and from a slight search in Google news I found another moderately good source. LastJabberwocky (talk) 07:56, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reiner Frieske

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

Non-notable German handball player. I was unable to find any in-depth sources about him. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:27, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:27, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: silver medallist from the 1970 World Men's Handball Championship, according to de:wiki. Geschichte (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: Notable for the following reasons: (see German Wikipedia for a slightly more detailed entry)

East German Handball Champion: He was a goalkeeper for the team that won the "DDR-Meister: (East German Championship) in 1964.
International Handball Player: Frieske played for the East German national handball team.
World Championship Appearances: He represented East Germany in the World Handball Championships in 1964, 1967, and 1970, with the team finishing 2nd place in 1970.
Olympian: He competed as part of the East German handball team at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich. He played in 6 out of 6 games during the tournament. The team played in the bronze medal match, but was edged out by Romania (19-16), finishing in 4th place.

References that I found clicking Google News above were in German. — ERcheck (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per ERcheck and sources which I found [29] and [30]. Note: Some sources wrote Rainer instead of Reiner. 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 (talk) 10:23, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Handball and Olympics. Let'srun (talk) 02:34, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:29, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not encyclopedic and not really relevant to the English wiki. The German version of article looks pretty short too with only 3 sources. Ramos1990 (talk) 07:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:59, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – PDF file looks decent, but does the second newspaper even mention him? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:20, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes in the bottom left corner with the title "Geachtet als Sportsmann und Kamerad". 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 (talk) 14:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's just an interview without independent analysis, so I'd lean towards Delete. Multiple sources containing significant coverage are required. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found more sources similar to the other pdf, centre left, bottom centre. 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 (talk) 15:38, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per sources presented in this AfD and WP:AGF. Svartner (talk) 10:40, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jonas Behounek

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

Does not pass GNG. The player appears only in databases. No sport achievements, he played only in lower German tiers. FromCzech (talk) 09:53, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Germany. FromCzech (talk) 09:53, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The player appears only in databases. This article from Hamburger Abendblatt is WP:SIGCOV. he played only in lower German tiers. After signing a professional contract with Hamburger SV,[31] he made 28 appearances in the fully professional 3. Liga and over 130 appearances in the semi-professional fourth-tier Regionalliga Nord. The Abendblatt article is not sufficient for me. Perhaps someone can dig up more? Robby.is.on (talk) 10:27, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The first source is decent, but in my opinion, even only one significant coverage provided on articles is still too weak to establish notability. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:31, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per de:Jonas Behounek Govvy (talk) 21:55, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had seen the article in German and it really seems to have enough sources. Svartner (talk) 23:39, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, most of the sources are from his (former) clubs. Would you consider one of the sources SIGCOV? Robby.is.on (talk) 23:45, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Robby.is.on: WP:BASIC has always said then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability, so with what's online, whats on the German article. (although a little heavy on primary sources) I feel it's okay for the basic criteria. I also see room for improvement for both articles. Govvy (talk) 07:46, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The club references aren't independent though, which was my main point. Which of the sources in the German article do you consider usable for our article, even if not necessarily SIGCOV? Robby.is.on (talk) 11:17, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I remind what GNG says, that SIGCOV is not a guarantee that a subject merits its own page. His greatest sporting achievements are single season in the 3rd highest German league (during which he contributed to his team's relegation to the 4th league) and an unsuccessful trial at a second league club (as dewiki says). Common sense does not see this as something that should have an entry in an encyclopedia. FromCzech (talk) 08:48, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:46, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:50, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:30, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IndustryMasters

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

IndustryMasters the company(?) and IndustryMasters the game (formerly IndustryPlayer) fail WP:ORG. I could not find in-depth coverage in reliable sources online.

There are five sources cited but actually eight in total; three are pasted in the middle of the article as external links. Citation 1 is a permanently dead link. Citations 2 to 4 verify that the IndustryMasters website was used to host one event (one game) of a competition in India from 2006 to 2010. Citation 5 does not mention, but is being used to verify the existence of, the event and competition. The first external link is a YouTube video announcing that IndustryMasters won a Learning Technologies Award, a private initiative. The second external link is a WBS source that briefly mentions IndustryMasters twice in the context of the WBS working with them. The Warwick Business School source is an announcement of its partnership with IndustryMasters.

The sourced content does not indicate anything particularly remarkable about the IndustryMasters company(?) and the rest of the article, including information about its gameplay and utility, is wholly unsourced. Its biggest claim to fame is winning an award in 2020 in its niche subset of educational games.

This article was recreated by Sunshinebr after its preceding article IndustryPlayer was deleted on 6 June 2008. Sunshinebr justified the recreation by saying they added sources, but evidently the sources are not in-depth or independent of the company and nobody had bothered scrutinising them until now. All of this article's content was written by Sunshinebr (other users' edits being general cleanup) and nearly all of Sunshinebr's edits are limited to this article.

Seems to me that an article for a non-notable game and later company was recreated and managed to pass unnoticed for several years. Yet through all that time, not one reliable, independent source covered either the game or company in detail, hence a failure of WP:ORG. Yue🌙 01:27, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Organizations. Yue🌙 01:27, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:27, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am the contributor sunshinebr. some inaccuracies in Yue's commentary _ IndustryMasters is a registered trademark for a proprietary and unique business simulation platform with hundreds of simulation variants, used by major corporations and business schools across the world. To call it non-notable is a distortion. - The activity in India was not 1 game but many editions and variations, and several top business schools. - The Learning Technology awards are a prestigious annual industry event in the UK. Not exactly a "private initiative" as Yue has stated. It may not be US-based, but is important in our industry, recognizing exceptional standards and performance as well as extremely close collaboration with a major academic institution. - I have removed reference 1 (the dead link) from the CPA of Australia as it seems to be out of print now. at the time of original publishing it was a valid reference. - The IndustryMasters platform continues to develop and publish in 2025 and will shortly announce major technological advances in business simulation programming. I would hope that Wikipedia would advance into the 21st century with its thinking, and provide a useful reference to the world across academia and industry.

. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunshinebr (talk • contribs) 10:46, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability on Wikipedia is established by citing independent reliable sources providing enough detail on the topic, not just stating about its subjective importance or awards; this is especially true for articles about companies. ObserveOwl (talk) 03:14, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not seeing notability here against WP:NCORP. The sourcing present in the article fails to support significant coverage that would detail key information to describe the business and its products. The article is littered with promotional jargon that is generally not encyclopedic at all. The sources indicate some recognition in the field, but these are scattered amongst products or business practices that fail to provide context to the business or really evidence anything about its core notability. If the business is notable within or outside its industry, broader sourcing about the business would be expected. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Delete I cannot see it's notability either. Business descriptions, paid and self-published sources only. Maybe some sources exist. --Unicorbia (talk) 13:32, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is an unbolded Keep here so Soft Deletion is not an option. A source review would be helpful here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:22, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even if notability surfaces, this article appears WP:TNT worthy, especially given the non-improvement since 2008. The Learning Technologies Awards might be a relevant trade award here, but that doesn't save the article. IgelRM (talk) 21:19, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of source review was suggested here? The first 3 are about from a conference, the 4 a homepage of an institute, 5 a gala video and 6, 7 on the Warwick School partnership. That's a clear delete. IgelRM (talk) 19:31, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Hessische Geschichten (via WP:PROD on 7 November 2024)

Greece

Typaldos D. children's choir

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

I think this sort of thing (a children's band from a foreign country) is a uniquely difficult thing to find sources on. All the same I'm failing to find coverage in-depth coverage reliable sources (lots of passing credits or else promotion of upcoming event). I'm also having trouble finding anything about the award talked about in the article (although again it being a Portuguese award from the 90s, which I only have the English name of makes confirmation difficult). I don't see this passing based on this though, as it doesn't seem to be a "major music competition", as WP:BAND requires. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 12:42, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Greece. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 12:42, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This article doesn't cite any sources at all and fails WP:BAND. The award talked about in specific is not notable, and upon trying to find any reliable sources for the choir, none can be found.

WormEater13 (talk) 12:54, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nom, only award is from a non-notable organization and reliable sources are absent. Fails WP:BAND. Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 13:15, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not notable Lord Mountbutter (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacks sources, which raises concerns about its verifiability and notability. --Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 11:06, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Chiliopodarousa (via WP:PROD on 11 April 2025)

Hungary

Golddigger (film)

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

Non-notable film. I was unable to find any significant coverage about it. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:20, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Television. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:20, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I did find this mention, however it's only in snippet view so I can't see how in-depth it goes. Google translate does seem to suggest that it's likely a bit longer so could probably be used to help establish notability. I haven't checked in English yet, so there may be a bit more there. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:53, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaning towards a keep. According to this, the film did receive coverage back in the day - reviews were published in trades and film magazines. They were by fellow filmmakers and their friends, however the author makes it clear that this was probably a case of them being friendly to their peers since it wasn't a particularly cutthroat atmosphere at the time. In other words, they're most likely usable if one could find them and it's not a case of say, only Curtiz's friends writing reviews. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:09, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At bare minimum this should redirect to the director's filmography page. But there does seem to be coverage, it just didn't make it onto the internet. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:12, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep This is by the legend Michael Curtiz, although I haven't seen the film, it has some prominence behind it for the name of the director. I wouldn't be surprised if this is noted in books. Per above comments and WP:OFFLINESOURCES should exist, I am inclined for a keep. Govvy (talk) 22:50, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:17, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Survivor – A sziget

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

Lots of edits since 2011 by no WP:RS. merge with larger article on Survivor television program. Survivor (franchise) Variety312 (talk) 20:56, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Entertainment, and Hungary. Variety312 (talk) 20:56, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Variety312. Ramos1990 (talk) 00:43, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Survivor (franchise) . 190.219.103.171 (talk) 21:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE. Geschichte (talk) 16:49, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Flag of Serbia (Habsburg) (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)

Iceland

Democracy Movement (Iceland)

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

Looking through sources that I was able to find online, I did see brief mentions of the party, mostly on visir.is, but did not find any sources that would convice me that the party has received significant coverage in independent sources. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Europe, and Iceland. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirecet to Ástþór Magnússon Wium. Geschichte (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Ireland

Holywell, Swords

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

This appears to be a housing estate, or a common name between neighbouring housing estates. I don’t see that it fulfills the criteria of WP:NSETTLEMENT. Unlike nearby Drinan or Brackenstown, it doesn’t have a logainm.ie entry. One possible benefit of retention as an article is as an area in the broader Swords region which is part of the Kinsealy–Drinan census area, rather than the Swords census area, but that would hold as true for Seatown, Lissenhall, or Drynam, mentioned on that part of the Swords article. There could be a case to expand Kinsealy–Drinan from a redirect to include all such places, with a note on the historic townland of Drinan. But that doesn’t speak to the notability of Holywell as distinct from many other housing developments. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And then it rained for seven days

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

Fails WP:NSONG a before turned up nothing, sources in the article include a dead unrelaible source, a live unrelaible source, an interview and user generated site Olliefant (she/her) 17:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, and Ireland. Olliefant (she/her) 17:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Music for Dead Birds. While seemingly not notable enough for a standalone article, there's information and sources there that should be preserved. Vegantics (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect to Music for Dead Birds#Discography. As WP:ATD. (Per nom and from my own WP:BEFORE search, have to agree that there's insufficient independent coverage to warrant a standalone title. However, covering the album WP:WITHIN the band article is probably reasonable. With, per WP:MUSICOUTCOMES and WP:SUBNOT, a redirect retained.) Guliolopez (talk) 18:28, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into parent album. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 09:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as suggested. Bearian (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nom. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:03, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shooting of James Whelan

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

This murder fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTNEWS. It clearly has no significant impact on the world, only British news sources covered this murder and not for a long period of time. The murder was forgotten within a month, no sources beyond April/May 2022. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and United Kingdom. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Yes, no coverage past 2022 that I can find either. Appears to not have had a lasting impact. NOTNEWS. Oaktree b (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Ireland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:16, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lots of initial coverage due to the relative rarity of gun violence in Ireland, but no lasting coverage or indications of wider impacts of the event. nf utvol (talk) 17:36, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:NOTNEWS. Spleodrach (talk) 17:59, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, just a recap of news articles without secondary coverage. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:26, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Coverage is limited to news reports in the one month vicinity of the shooting. No enduring notability, fails WP:NOTNEWS. Flip^and Flopped ツ 01:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: sources are all routine coverage and just a rephrase writing of the case. Does not meet any nobility as well. Imwin567 (talk) 05:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Airside Retail Park

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

Based on the category this is in, this is one of two retail parks in the State with articles. But from the article, I can’t discern what makes it notable. Its external coverage is routine: it was constructed, has certain facilities and a large anchor tenant in the Tesco, all of which brought jobs. Isn’t this the same as dozens if not hundreds of retail parks? The content could possibly be merged into the Swords article. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The creator of this article was subject to a sockpuppet investigation relating to other retail park articles, so I’m not inclined to give the benefit of the doubt here. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 08:49, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable, no WP:SIGCOV, and nothing actually worth merging. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 09:38, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect to Swords,_Dublin#Commercial_and_retail. Or, failing that, simply delete. While Wikipedia:WikiProject Shopping Centers doesn't have specific notability guidelines, WP:NBUILDING and WP:GNG apply. And there is nothing to indicate that this retail park meets either guideline. (In short, while a WP:BEFORE returns mentions of the retail park's name in news articles, it is mainly "incidental" coverage. Where the subject isn't the primary topic of the coverage and is mentioned in passing in news coverage about something else (like this on RTÉ where the main topic is the MetroLink, or this in the Fingal Independent where the new Tesco store could have been elsewhere and probably would have had the same coverage.) I cannot find any material sources which cover the subject as a primary topic in any depth. The only sources I can find would only allow for expansion of a "tenants" sections (which would be completely inappropriate relative to WP:TENANTS and WP:NOTDIRECTORY). And, unless I'm missing something, I can't find sources to expand on the site's history/architecture/operation/ownership/etc.) The only reason I'm advocating a merge/redirect, as an alternative to deletion, is because of the volume of mentions returned in a WP:BEFORE. Making it a plausible search term that may warrant a target WP:WITHIN another article.... Guliolopez (talk) 09:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Routine strip mall from what I see. Not unlike any hundreds of others all over the planet. It's not architecturally notable, I don't see a connection to any historic event. Just a retail space, doing retail things. Oaktree b (talk) 14:50, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Very WP:MILL strip center. Nathannah • 📮 20:33, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juvenile Liaison Officer

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

Little sources avaliable, no notability. Article is unencyclopedic as well. This article was created in 2006 by a brand new editor with little changes since. GoldRomean (talk) 15:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:30, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Law. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep (and improve/move to Garda National Youth Diversion Bureau or Garda National Youth Diversion Programme). As noted in the nom, the article at this title is/was something of a disaster. However, I don't think that WP:DYNAMITE is the answer here. In my own WP:BEFORE it seems that the titular subject (a "Garda Juvenile Liaison Officer" or "JLO") acts under the Garda Youth Diversion Programme. (As per this source and this one and here). While the concept of a "JLO" is discussed in several sources (like here or here or here), I'm not sure the role/job/class of Gardaí has independent notability. However, the program of which they are part, the Garda Youth Diversion Programme, possibly is. And so I'd recommend that the article be moved to that title. And updated to cover that programme/bureau. With a small amount of the role of a JLO, within the bureau, covered by sources like this. Failing that, we could merge/redirect some of the text to the Garda Síochána title. And cover it WP:WITHIN that title. Guliolopez (talk) 08:25, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 08:45, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Merge I'm not sure it warrant more than a few lines on Garda Síochána. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 20:55, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ireland/Article_alerts#RfD

See: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Template:Hiberno-English

Italy

Storm in a Teacup (company)

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

Appears to fail WP:NCORP, WP:NOTINHERITED. a WP:BEFORE found funding coverage from Wired Italy but looks insufficient. Suggesting redirect to Close to the Sun. IgelRM (talk) 11:32, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Italy. IgelRM (talk) 11:32, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination (jewelry)

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

Although this company probably is notable according to the guidelines, the scope of this article largely duplicates that of Nomination bracelet, and I do not think it merits a separate article. Janhrach (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Products, Fashion, and Italy. Janhrach (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The topic may overlap with its product, but the notability is clear, with sources dating back to the 1980s. It is acceptable to have 2 pages for a company and its product, especially when the product is as famous as the company. --Kopnakolicti (talk) 07:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the company meets GNG and NORG. I've also added several additional sources with significant coverage from The Philippine Star and Scary Mommy, and a court ruling was also added. - Norlk (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep easy keep, as the company has reliable third-party and significant media coverage, and is notable in the jewelry worlds for its famous bracelets being copied or followed by other firms. Unicorbia (talk) 14:13, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carmen Letizia Giorgianni

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

The sourcing of this article is very weak for a BLP. I do not see any significant independent coverage online, even though she passes WP:NPOL. Janhrach (talk) 16:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Italy. Janhrach (talk) 16:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:45, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As the nominator mentions, the subject passes WP:NPOL as a member of the Italian Parliament. The sourcing currently present in the article certainly leaves a lot to be desired, but from a cursory search there seems to be enough to surpass WP:NOPAGE. Curbon7 (talk) 18:42, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this article may be a copyvio, it seems to closely follow this. Janhrach (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, definitely no copyvio and passes WP:NPOL as a national deputy. Cavarrone 05:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NPOL. But it looks like an unattributed translation of the older it.wiki article], so needs some work. PamD 07:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And after keeping, Move to Letizia Giorgianni per sources and it.wiki. PamD 07:54, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, also support the move after a Keep !vote per WP:COMMONNAME. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:06, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rachele Focardi

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

Does not seem to pass NPEOPLE. I see only passing mentions in independent sources. [32] is an interview, so it is neither secondary nor independent. [33] seems to have some coverage, but if I interpret Acknowledgements correctly, the coverage is primarily based on interviews, so this source is also not independent. I also see a few other interviews, but nothing notability-confering. Janhrach (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Management, Asia, and Italy. Janhrach (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:46, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

BluRadio (via WP:PROD on 22 March 2025)

Latvia

Others

Lithuania

Others

Moldova

Mykhailo Tkachuk

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

I'm a bit unsure of this one, as he played mainly in the 1990s and had a rather long career, but in all four related languages, I could only find this, which is hardly WP:SIGCOV. I could find literally nothing else—hardly even a mention of his existence. The article has also been a stub for going on 10 years now. I figured that it would be worth putting it up for discussion here, as it doesn't appear as though this article is improvable without seeking out physical archives for information—and even then it's not guaranteed. I'm curious if anyone else can find anything on this player. Anwegmann (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete The uk-wiki article is much more detailed, but it seems that this person does not satisfy the notability threshold for sportsmen, as well as it fails WP:SIGCOV. --Altenmann >talk 01:53, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Moldova, Russia, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 17:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Monument of Liberty, Chișinău

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

It does not seem to have ever been actually constructed. I can't read Moldovan/Romanian, but based on Google Translate, it seems like it was never constructed, and given the death of the head architect, it might not be anytime soon, if ever. Street View ~2019 also shows no signs of any monument near the Moldovan Parliament. At present, the article describes nothing about the actual sculpture and is essentially about a concept. Please let me know what you think. Eelmealdeal (talk) 20:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Moldova. Shellwood (talk) 20:45, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as of 2024 it hadn't been built [34]. There seems to have been some controversy over the suceeding governments dragging its construction which would add to notability in case it is built, but I don't think the topic is currently notable, and can be covered in the 2009 revolution's article. Super Ψ Dro 13:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Montenegro

Others

Netherlands

Stefan Pop (Dutch comedian)

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

The sourcing here is at best dubious: some theatrical database, a club and a festival. The subject is likely associated with all three; all three are promotional blurbs. Independent coverage is glaringly absent. — Biruitorul ^Talk 18:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the ugly side of Wikipedia. The sources used are qualitative in nature. But to satisfy you I have used a few more sources from the largest newspapers in the Netherlands. I also do not appreciate that you insinuate that I am in any way connected to Stefan Pop. Coriovallum (talk) 18:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are quite a lot of articles available, but they are mostly connected to the recent sketch and a recent incident in Lubach. But there is for example this interview, which signals some notability. Dajasj (talk) 08:05, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ExitMundi.nl

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

Apparently defunct website. After a prod almost twenty years ago, a bit of uncited and unsourced content was slapped on carelessly, with some evidence of COI or at least NPOV violation. I am inclined to say that notability was never established. Orange Mike | Talk 19:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 19:25, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- somewhat confused by this nomination: four reliable news sources are cited, even though one is a 404. That establishes clear notability by the GNG -- it is irrelevant whether the website is now defunct. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose deletion, but I actually think it would be best if this would be part of an article about Maarten Keulemans (which is now a redirect). Maarten Keulemans has become sufficiently notable since the article about ExitMundi.nl was written. Dajasj (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Theo van Zwieteren

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

None of the sources in the article seem to provide WP:SIGCOV, and I was unable to find any on Google or newspaper archives such as Newspapers.com, Delpher, Archief Eemland, Stadsarchief Rotterdam, and Gallica. I did find some mentions like 1 and 2 using an abbreviation of his name ("T. van Zwieteren"), but nothing substantive. Another Dutch referee (albeit with much more international experience) from the same era, Raphaël van Praag, was recently kept after multiple in-depth sources were found using these same archives, so maybe someone else has more luck. JTtheOG (talk) 21:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Netherlands. JTtheOG (talk) 21:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noooooo!!!! I was literally going to put this page on a draft tomorrow!! Couldn't you have waited just a few more hours!! Barr Theo (talk) 22:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Draftify~~ – If Barr Theo is working on improvements to the page. I'll ping @Gidonb: in any case, but I see no reason to delete it. Svartner (talk) 22:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – I'm working on it. Barr Theo (talk) 23:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Not enough WP:SIGCOV is currently present. Draftify as a WP:ATD to allow interested editors time to work on finding sources Let'srun (talk) 00:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Barr Theo, Let'srun, and Clara A. Djalim, with the extra sources, can we settle for a keep? gidonb (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a historically important referee, by WP:NEXIST and by the WP:GNG that is fully met. Theo van Zwieteren passed away in 1962, so no BLP concerns apply. The article was created by Barr Theo based on his historical significance, and that assessment holds.

I was recently pointed to this article by the creator and made several corrections—his date of birth, for example, was off by a day. This followed my overhaul of an article on Raphaël van Praag, a distant cousin I had never heard of before. Van Praag, who was also a gifted communicator, became Holland’s favorite son in Belgian soccer management. He left the field forever just before much of our family was exterminated.

Van Zwieteren’s international experience extended beyond the Netherlands, in international games, and during his residence in Hamburg. That, too, is worth exploring. The sources cited are from Delpher, which aggregates historical Dutch newspapers. This is the correct search string. For the Rotterdam region, I also check the Schiedam-based Krantenkijker, though it often yields less than Delpher.

These are sources that by themselves provide SIGCOV:

T. van Zwieteren – 'oer'-Spartaan – overleden [Theo van Zwieteren – Spartan to the core – deceased]. Het Rotterdamsch Parool. Rotterdam, 13-12-1962, p. 11. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMSARO03:259021037:mpeg21:p00011
"Th. van Zwieteren" [Theo van Zwieteren]. Provinciale Drentsche en Asser Courant. Assen, 05-02-1926. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMDA03:000110709:mpeg21:p002

These are sources from which SIGCOV can be pieced together, a legitimate approach for historically important professionals (see the subsequent list):

"Uruguay door de Belgen verslagen: De Nederlandsche scheidsrechter gemolesteerd" [Uruguay defeated by the Belgians: The Dutch referee assaulted]. Nieuwe Tilburgsche Courant. Tilburg, 02-06-1925, p. 1. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010234500:mpeg21:p001
"Na den wedstrijd Quick–Vitesse" [After the game Quick–Vitesse]. Provinciale Geldersche en Nijmeegsche Courant. Nijmegen, 30-11-1923. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMRANM02:000023856:mpeg21:p002
"De kwestie van den wedstrijd Sparta—H.V.V." [The issue of the game Sparta—HVV]. "Het Vaderland". The Hague, 10-11-1922, p. 1. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010008151:mpeg21:p005
"Kampioenwedstrijd" [Championship game]. Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant. Rotterdam, 08-05-1922, p. 13. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010026058:mpeg21:p013

These are sources that state Van Zwieteren's importance as a referee:

"Th. van Zwieteren" [Theo van Zwieteren]. Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad. Rotterdam, 18-08-1925, p. 14. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010495552:mpeg21:p014
"Willem II—Wilhelmina. Nieuwe Tilburgsche Courant. Tilburg, 17-12-1921, p. 10. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010233459:mpeg21:p010
"Bestuursvergadering van den N.V.B. [Board meeting of the NVB]" Nieuwe Tilburgsche Courant. Tilburg, 06-02-1924, p. 1. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010234102:mpeg21:p001 [frontpage news]
"Zandvoort—Quick 0–0". De Maasbode. Rotterdam, 06-04-1925. Delpher, 09-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMKB04:000194357:mpeg21:p010

gidonb (talk) 02:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More than sufficient for me to a keep. Svartner (talk) 08:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Could anyone analysis how in-depth are the last four sources about him? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Clariniie! I can take that. The last four sources are not in depth. These sources are significant because they talk to the importance of Van Zwieteren, i.e. the sources are important in a category other than SIGCOV. The first two sources are SIGCOV and the next four sources contribute toward SIGCOV. gidonb (talk) 18:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show notability (AGF). Giant Snowman 17:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gidonb: I'm pretty sure the first SIGCOV link you posted is the incorrect one as it consists of one sentence of coverage and is a duplicate of the Rotterdamsch Nieuwsblad link below it. Cheers, JTtheOG (talk) 18:27, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for noting. I corrected that three minutes before your comment. gidonb (talk) 18:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep It's very thin in my opinion, I am not quite sure it's at the level needed for what constitutes a good article for a biography. Feels thin, but maybe just enough for WP:BASIC. I would like to see it improved if possible. Govvy (talk) 08:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I found additional sources:

Th. van Zwieteren [Theo van Zwieteren]. Het Vaderland. The Hague, 29-09-1925, p. 3. Delpher, 10-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010009928:mpeg21:p003
Th. van Zwieteren [Theo van Zwieteren]. Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant. Rotterdam, 08-11-1923, p. 2. Geraadpleegd op Delpher op 10-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010026880:mpeg21:p002
De wedstrijden van Zondag a.s. [The games of upcoming Sunday]. "Arnhemsche courant". Arnhem, 05-12-1922. Geraadpleegd op Delpher op 10-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMKB08:000105208:mpeg21:p006
"De ongeregeldheden op 18 december" [The disturbances of 18 December]. De Maasbode. Rotterdam, 09-01-1922. Delpher, 10-04-2025, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=MMKB04:000189322:mpeg21:p009

These sources belong to my categories II and III above, often combined. With the previous we have a clear and complete pass of the GNG! We already had that yet these sources add even more material to use!!! gidonb (talk) 14:09, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Radio in the Flemish Community

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

The subject of this article fails WP:GNG. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Netherlands. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 09:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This type of article is very common. To link a few: Radio in France, Radio in Germany, Radio in Austria and Radio in the Republic of Ireland. Concerning the notability of the Flemish Community: since Belgium is roughly split into two language regions, each region has its own set of radio stations. AllOriginalBubs (talk) 15:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AllOriginalBubs, the examples are from primary level national units. Do you claim that this level should be skipped in Belgium? gidonb (talk) 03:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:50, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mass media in Belgium#Radio as an ATD for an unjustified spinoff. Not sure that any of the information is missing there yet access and history would be preserved. gidonb (talk) 09:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A quick search of Google Books shows the following English-language sources: Who Owns the World's Media? Media Concentration and Ownership Around the World (Oxford University Press) [35], pages 42-43; Media Compass: A Companion to International Media Landscapes (Wiley) [36], pages 22-23; The Media in Europe: The Euromedia Handbook (SAGE Publications) [37], pages 21-23. I'm sure there's more, in English and in other languages. If there were an article on Radio in Belgium, equivalent to Television in Belgium, it might be appropriate to merge this article there - but I don't think that merging or redirecting to Mass media in Belgium, which covers radio, tv, press, would be appropriate. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:33, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:12, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Amsterdam stabbing attack

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

Minor incident - no deaths. WP:GNG is dubious (consider WP:SINGLEEVENT and WP:NOTNEWS). Very unlikely to have enduring effects; if they appear the article can be restored once enduring coverage is shown to exist. We are getting really too inclusionist with minor incidents like this. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:52, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Netherlands. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:52, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep by the GNG and EVENT. By Dutch standards this is a major attack and the national and international coverage reflects that. The stabbing took place in the very heart of Amsterdam which further contributes to the interest. In the deletion rationale, nominator points at WP:SINGLEEVENT: "People notable for only one event". An attack is not a person so this does not support deletion. WP:NOTNEWS does not support deletion either: For example, routine news coverage of announcements, events, sports, or celebrities, while sometimes useful, is not by itself a sufficient basis for inclusion of the subject of that coverage. The references used fall outside the domain defined by the policy. gidonb (talk) 06:24, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"By Dutch standards this is a major attack" - yet no Dutch Wikipedia article? And I see this as a routine reporting on a newsworthy but unencyclopedic crime that will be forgotten by everyone in few days._{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:09, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coverage continues. Nlwiki is not known for quality. gidonb (talk) 17:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

😅 very convinient explanation Lord Mountbutter (talk) 19:22, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Always happy to help! If you're curious, you can read more about Nlwiki's quality here or check out the ongoing coverage in major Dutch and international media. gidonb (talk) 01:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep broadly covered, it happened in the center of big city. It's terrorist attack, to terror there no need to someone be killed. Many nations involved: US, NL, PL, BE victims, UK citizen's arrest and probably Ukrainian perpetrator; that 6 nations involved. That's international terrorism Bildete (talk) 09:04, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:06, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep by the GNG and EVENT. For now the sources and event is notable.BabbaQ (talk) 09:48, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, because Wikipedia:NOTNEWS. Ιf it has a more permanent impact (which I very much doubt) it can be recreated. Lord Mountbutter (talk) 19:20, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you doubt that the Dutch produce books, newspapers, magazines, news shows, and conduct research discussing, among others, mass stabbings? gidonb (talk) 22:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But is this an enduring event? Without that, it's just news that will be forgotten soon if it hasn't been already. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:46, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a hot topic every day https://www.dutchnews.nl/2025/04/amsterdam-stabbing-suspect-had-terrorist-intent-investigators/ and will be for a long time. Also it's historical event first event of Ukrainian terrorism in western Europe as 2022 missile explosion in Poland and it happened in city center of big city, huge news, international victims Bildete (talk) 08:01, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Errr, what is the connection of this to the 2022 missile explosion in Poland? Here a crazy guy stabbed few folks, none fatally. To me this is not a notable event, not until its coverage is enduring (as in, it is referenced in future years, preferably by academic sources). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That was significant because for first time West civilians been killed by Ukrainian missile, this is one of the first case of Ukrainian nationalist terrorize the West and had really huge international covered, also because a lot of West citizens were involved as victims Bildete (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I think you are making a good case that this article can be abused by Russian disinformation and propaganda, and we should delete it ASAP. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:26, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:09, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wikipedia is not a repository of news stories. Come back when this is a case study or books are being written about it. Secondary coverage beyond the news is the bare minimum. Not sure what some of the keep votes are trying to accomplish with rationales that have nothing to do with the sourcing. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:15, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Wikipedia:NOTNEWS. it's historical event first event of Ukrainian terrorism in western Europe, actually there is only suspicion that this could be some kind of terrorism, though no indication whatsoever that it is "Ukrainian terrorism" (is there such a thing? Are its goals pro-Ukrainian or anti-Ukrainian?). It could equally be a motiveless crime committed by a disturbed person, who ist happened to come from Donetsk. {{TQ|Ιf it has a more permanent impact … it can be recreated)).Pincrete (talk) 15:21, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: it's looks like the only reason to delete is because Ukrainians don't want to see article about Ukrainian terrorist. That a significant event that been and still is broadly covered Bildete (talk) 15:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. To me it looks like you're just hellbent on trying to connect this event to Ukrainian nationalism and "terrorism" because of the perpetrator's nationality. THEFREEENCYCLOPEDlA (talk) 22:22, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:LASTING (WP:LASTINGCRIME) Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 04:04, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the 2018 Amsterdam stabbing attack previous with 2 victims is at wiki for 7 years this one should be too, no matter if perpetrator is Afgan or Ukrainian Bildete (talk) 09:41, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a strong argument. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:20, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

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

North Macedonia

Lefter Koxhaj

AfDs for this article:

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

The article has been deleted two times before for lack of notability. There is still a lack of significant and in-depth coverage about the subject. Sources mostly mention him in relation with one event - the 2001 Skopje police raid. Wikipedia is not a memorial, so I think this recreation should stop. StephenMacky1 (talk) 10:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Albania, and North Macedonia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 10:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Same as the last two AfD, this isn't a notable person. I'm not even sure it would warrant a mention in the National Liberation Army article. Appears as a memorial, but the person has been gone for 20 yrs, if nothing's come up for notable/reliable sources in that time, I doubt much more will. Oaktree b (talk) 14:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete: The notability is proven by several sources. Even though the sources mostly mention him in relation with the 2001 Skopje police raid, he also participated in numerous battles (Insurgency in the Preshevo Valley, Battle of Slupčane, Lipkovo crisis,Battle of Matejče and Aračinovo crisis). He was one of the most prominent NLA commanders without any doubt which is proven by sources like the North Macedonian Civil Media or Tetova Sot. Furthermore there is the source of Radio Kosova e Lire which describes his early life and involvement in the Insurgency in the Preshevo Valley and 2001 insurgency in Macedonia.

Mitrovica02 (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and WP:SALT. Still fails WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 08:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pazar3

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

Pazar3 is a Macedonian online marketplace founded in 2006. This marketplace lacks significant coverage by reliable independent sources. The page was created by this account Pazar3 Macedonia (talk · contribs). LastJabberwocky (talk) 20:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Macedonia-related deletion discussions. LastJabberwocky (talk) 20:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. LastJabberwocky (talk) 20:34, 5 April 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 April 5. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:51, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:03, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of adequate sourcing. Nothing out there to prove that this is a notable marketplace. Mekomo (talk) 07:23, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Norway

Open iT

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

Fails WP:NCORP. The Computerworld article only contains a brief mention that some other company used Open iT's products, and the other two sources were authored by a company employee. Can't find anything else besides trivial mentions and another article published by a senior employee. Also this source which is apparently a vanity award publication after looking through online reviews. The generic name makes it hard to search, though. Deproded in 2006. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:06, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Norway. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 01:06, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not meet WP:NCORP an company's software WP:NSOFT. As-written the article reads like a brochure for the company's products. Most available sources don't appear to be independent of the company either.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 01:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asle og Alida

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

Article about an upcoming new opera, not reliably sourced as passing inclusion criteria. As always, operas are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy media coverage about them -- but this is "referenced" solely to the self-published website of the opera company that's producing it, with no media coverage or analysis about it shown at all.
No prejudice against recreation later in the year if and when it does have adequate GNG-worthy coverage to satisfy inclusion standards, but a single primary source is not sufficient for it to already have an article now. Bearcat (talk) 16:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Norway. Bearcat (talk) 16:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - I found this news article and also this. Both are in Norwegian, for which I can only read a few cognates. Ping me if more information comes up. Bearian (talk) 03:34, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With a Nobel prize-winning librettist and notable composer, I don't think we need a crystal ball to know that there will be SIGCOV of this opera, whether it's a success or a flop. Its premiere is 5 days away - why delete it when it can be expanded and have more sources added in less than a week? The NRK source found by Bearian could be added now; the other source is paywalled for me. (No, I can't read Norwegian - I just put it in Google Translate, which is good enough to provide the info that it was commissioned by Eivind Gullberg Jensen, the current director of the Bergen Opera, and Frank Kjosås will take the title role, despite never having sung in an opera before ...) RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:29, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This opera premiered at the second largest opera house in Norway, the libretto written by a noble prize laureate and a Grawemeyer award composer… 158.248.40.59 (talk) 08:27, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Things get Wikipedia articles if and when they have WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about them in media, and are not automatically entitled to be included in Wikipedia just because they exist. So it's not a question of the fact that it premiered, it's a question of showing WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about it in media. Bearcat (talk) 21:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Kjosås does not have the title role, he plays Asleik (not Asle) which is mainly a speaking role, with few line of singing.--158.248.40.59 (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now. I likely wouldn't have created it prior to the premiere...but it has been created. And since it's been premiered I expect to see some reviews in the next couple of months (I'll try to remember to look for one in next month's issue of Opera magazine, or the following one.) We can revisit in a few months if the reviews are not forthcoming, but I expect them to be. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Though article created in late march 2025, I think we should give it some time before nominating for delete. Barely premiered. After a while it is not notable, then perhaps nominate for delete. Ramos1990 (talk) 21:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 06:50, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep there are 5 sources, but only 3 seem to be more reliable or notable. All are Norwegian, but that isn't a problem for GNG here. Good enough to Keep this one here. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are more reviews in Klassekampen [38], Dagsavisen [39], Dag og Tid [40]. Most have a paywall (I have read them though), but I don't think it is the point to sum up every single opinion about the opera. Here is an English one [41], but that was sponsored by BNO, and a long background interview with Sørensen [42] (not a very big magazine though).--158.248.40.59 (talk) 23:00, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Karl & Co (via WP:PROD on 25 October 2024)

Poland

Others

Please also see here

Portugal

CMS-Helmets

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NORG, there is no WP:SIGCOV. A review for one of their products does not grant notability. Coeusin (talk) 11:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Portugal. Coeusin (talk) 11:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:55, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Romania

Laura Oprea

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

Does not have enough coverage to meet WP:NSPORT requirements. All the articles I found on her where just a mention of her name. Darkm777 (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Darkm777 (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Please stop wasting our time with these Olympic medalist deletion discussions. Coverage exists; see the extensive Romanian article, and Oprea is extremely accomplished, having numerous world championship medals, being a world champion and Olympic medalist, which satisfies WP:NOLY. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:22, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Looking at the corresponding Romanian article, [[43]] appears to be WP:SIGCOV, and while [[44]] and [[45]] are less impressive I think there is enough here for a WP:SPORTSBASIC pass. Let'srun (talk) 02:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Let'srun and Beaniefan11. Canary757 (talk) 07:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Olympics, and Romania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A participant and medalist of a world's foremost sports competition is considered notable. Best Regards (CP) 08:18, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per above. The nominator does not seem to understand the basic guidelines of the project. Svartner (talk) 12:42, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per WP:GNG. Source are clear. This nom should be closed.BabbaQ (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Păduraru

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

Does not have enough coverage to meet WP:NSPORT requirements. Darkm777 (talk) 01:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Darkm777 (talk) 01:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Another in a series of poor mass Olympic medalist AFDs by this user. One needs to actually check relevant archives before deleting; in this case, there appears to be many mentions in newspaper archives that should be checked. Remember that Paduraru is an Olympic medalist and world championship medalist in the offline era and coverage is virtually guaranteed to exist for this star Romanian sportswoman. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:30, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Olympics, and Romania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per BeanieFan11 and WP:COMMONSENSE. Svartner (talk) 12:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Similarly as per BeanieFan11, Svartner and WP:COMMONSENSE. Nayyn (talk) 19:25, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Enough of these pointless noms. Clearly notableper WP:GNG. BabbaQ (talk) 10:27, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eugen Almer

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

Declined prod. The 2 third party sources added [46] and [47] are very small 1 line mentions and not SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Romania. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not look notable and sourcing is weak. Ramos1990 (talk) 04:17, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No evidence of independent WP:SIGCOV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, extensive coverage in newspaper archives that need to be checked. Several appear to give biographies of him and one mentions he received something like the title "Master of Sport of Romania", which would arguably satisfy WP:ANYBIO as well. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:37, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per the WP:HEY effort by BeanieFan11. The Knowledge Pirate (talk) 13:55, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elena Avram

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

Does not have enough coverage to meet WP:NSPORT requirements. Darkm777 (talk) 00:29, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. Darkm777 (talk) 00:29, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not as clear notability as the others, but she was a world championship medalist and Olympedia includes a photo that looks recent from the Sportarad newspaper, which indicates that they likely covered her. What we have to do is find it. Its also quite likely there'd be further offline coverage, given her accomplishments took place before the internet. BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:08, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NSPORT does not state that Olympic Medal Winners are automatically qualified. Rowing does not have its own policy, but some sports such as Track & Field do and state that "Significant coverage is likely to exist for athletes who compete in the field of athletics if they meet any of the criteria below." One of the criteria is to have Top 8 placement in a major competition, but even then we need to have significant news coverage. Could you point me out to any specific policy that states Olympic medal winners automatically qualify? Darkm777 (talk) 02:18, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where in my above comment did I say that Olympic Medal Winners are automatically qualified? BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:19, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No sports guideline grants automatic notability to anyone, but for what it's worth, Olympic medal winners are mentioned at WP:NOLY. Geschichte (talk) 13:20, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOLY states "Significant coverage is likely to exist." It doesn't say it is an automatic qualification. We still need significant coverage per the policies. Darkm777 (talk) 01:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Olympics, and Romania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:18, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Best Regards (CP) 22:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To me the bronze medal at 1975 World Rowing Championships is a pretty clear indication of notability.BabbaQ (talk) 14:48, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Russia

1982 Sukhumi Dranda Airport runway collision

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

Article has only primary (database) sourcing, and I could not find any significant coverage from a basic BEFORE search. The article has been tagged for reliance on a single source and not meeting GNG since August of last year, and no real improvements have been forthcoming. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Russia. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:28, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Sukhumi Babushara Airport. I searched Russian sources, but no one mentions it even the history page on the official airport website. Sadly, doesn't know a good Russian database to make a perfectly throurough research. LastJabberwocky (talk) 06:44, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Sukhumi Babushara Airport as an alternative to deletion per WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT – Other than databases, there exists no reliable secondary sources that provide significant or in-depth coverage of the event nor are there any demonstrated lasting effects nor long-term impacts on a significant region of the world that would make this event notable enough for a stand-alone article. This was the best I managed to find but isn't significant coverage of the collision:
Спустя три года, 14 августа 1982 года, в Сухумском аэропорту самолет Jet L-410 столкнулся на взлетно-посадочной полосе с Ту-134А. В авиаинциденте погибли все, кто находился в «Турболете» - 9 пассажиров и два члена экипажа.
[Three years later, on August 14, 1982, at the Sukhumi airport, a Jet L-410 collided with a Tu-134A on the runway. The incident killed everyone on board the Turbolet - nine passengers and two crew members.]
Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:04, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Russian Assassins

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

Tag team that lasted a year. Chief problem is WP:GNG: main sources are database entries, with a WP:BEFORE check pulling up nothing substantial. Two books are cited with this article: one page from an overview of WWE wrestling in the 80s (Shields: inaccessible on Google Books, but it would be hard to argue significant coverage from a single page overviewing an era of pro wrestling), and another broad book covering the history of pro wrestling. Nothing standalone is the concern with these cites. /over.throws/^✎ 16:18, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wrestling and United States of America. /over.throws/^✎ 16:18, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:04, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:05, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Even if it lasted for a year, it still attracted enough coverage to warrant a standalone article here. In principle, as David used to mention , Delete is reserved for when nothing else can be done to save/salvage. Information purged is information lost. This is apolitical, informational, and non controvertial (in wiki sense) , hence the suggestion. Devopam (talk) 05:15, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksei Gubanov

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

No claim to any notability. Fails WP:N. Deleted in Russian Wikipedia. Mitte27 (talk) 17:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Mitte27 (talk) 17:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, a couple of russian sources covered after he was recognized as a foreign agent on 4 April, even with this news the only notable magazine that covered it was Lenta.ru, which is blacklisted. Russian wiki also deleted the page. LastJabberwocky (talk) 18:16, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Internet, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - There is also a draft, Draft:Alexey Gubanov, which I have declined because this article exists. Is there any content or sources in the draft that can be added to the article? (I have not reviewed either the draft or the article in detail, and do not at this time have an opinion on notability.) Robert McClenon (talk) 05:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy and merge. I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm not putting any weight into whether or not the subject has a Russian language article. Bearian (talk) 04:19, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mykhailo Tkachuk

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

I'm a bit unsure of this one, as he played mainly in the 1990s and had a rather long career, but in all four related languages, I could only find this, which is hardly WP:SIGCOV. I could find literally nothing else—hardly even a mention of his existence. The article has also been a stub for going on 10 years now. I figured that it would be worth putting it up for discussion here, as it doesn't appear as though this article is improvable without seeking out physical archives for information—and even then it's not guaranteed. I'm curious if anyone else can find anything on this player. Anwegmann (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete The uk-wiki article is much more detailed, but it seems that this person does not satisfy the notability threshold for sportsmen, as well as it fails WP:SIGCOV. --Altenmann >talk 01:53, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Moldova, Russia, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 17:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Medal For the Construction of Transport Facilities (Russia)

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

Definitely exists. Could find several mentions of it being awarded, but not any in-depth coverage. Might be due to the language barrier, and if someone can find them in cyrillic, let me know. But as of now, does not meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can read Russian and there is nothing more than "it's exits" (from this document ПОЛОЖЕНИЕ о медали "За строительство транспортных объектов") and description of it (from this document ПРИЛОЖЕНИЕ к Положению о медали "За строительство транспортных объектов"). Plus a person can be awarded this medal "Почетный работник транспорта России" and a few other medals, if they already have "Medal For the Construction of Transport Facilities" (from "ПОЛОЖЕНИЕ о нагрудном знаке "Почетный работник транспорта России"). LastJabberwocky (talk) 21:17, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note – if the page is kept in any form, it should be moved to Medal for the Construction of Transport Facilities (correct capitalization and no unnecessary disambiguator). RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:52, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Julia Lebedeva

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

Fails WP:NSKATE. Fails WP:GNG. No evidence of notability. On-line searches yielded nothing. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, Armenia, and Russia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 21:29, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Armenia at the 2002 Winter Olympics: Both this and the corresponding Russian article are devoid of any type of secondary coverage. As such, the subject does not appear to meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Redirect as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 21:36, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She was actually quite famous. But my brief search didn't come with anything. (Understandably, cause 20 years have passed.)
I wouldn't delete articles like this. Cause you would need to find Russian and Armenian print papers from 97–02, they haven't been scanned for Google Books.
I've looked her up, she currently coaches very small kids in Moscow. Her students are so small, none of them are in the news, sadly. --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:47, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bordrline notable Olympic sportsman. Independent coverage does exist, but difficult to find. --Altenmann >talk 16:32, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notable how? Finishing in 27th place out of 27 skaters? Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:39, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's why she dropped competitive sport, sad. Still borderline WP:GNG/WP:SIGCOV. --Altenmann >talk 17:03, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is that "significant coverage" in the room with us now? Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:38, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I can see, Altenmann found her entry on Sport-strana.ru, a Russian online sports encyclopedia. There's a detailed article.
The Sport Strana encyclopedia may not seem well-designed (it is stuck somewhere in the 2000s), but it is being used in 590 Russian Wikipedia articles ([48]). So it is definitely a serious, reliable website. And their article about Lebedeva is actually well-written and looks good. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She represented Armenia at the Olympics and the Europeans, basically being an "acting" Armenian champion. (I have no idea if actual Armenian national championships were held at that time. So I can't prove she was actually a champion and thus passes WP:NSKATE.)
And she wasn't someone unknown even in Russia. She placed 6th at the Russian championships in the 1997/98 season and thus most probably qualified for the Russian national squad. Cause she represented Russia at the Golden Spin and Skate Israel early in the next season. --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. All that said, I think she passes WP:NSKATE as a de facto Armenian champion. (At least de facto.)
@Altenmann:. I was afraid to vote because of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1176#User:Bgsu98 mass-nominating articles for deletion and violating WP:BEFORE. Where the emphasis of the discussion I started was shifted to attacking me. Since then, I've been avoiding AfD and decided to come here only because I know Lebedeva was famous enough. As were many other Russian skaters whose article were deleted during the past year. --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A similar mop-up was earlier for footballers and ... pornstars. There was even a joke inforgaphics where, like, 55% of Wikipedia articles were pornstars, 25% pokemon :-). It is sad that now it seems to be 80% of Wikipedia edits is from wikignomes (that's what I see in my watchlist) rather than content creators. But there is a reasonable position that if a person is indeed notable to general public, not just to wikipedia lawyers, the bio will be recteated anyway ... or not. My personal approach is if I see some name mentioned an several wp articles, I write up a brief bio, such as Shulamit Volkov or Niyameddin Musayev or Bronislava Kerbelytė, to name a few of my articles no one cares about. --Altenmann >talk 18:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Of course Bgsu98 comes down as a 25-pound hammer on all these articles, but in his defense I may say that a HUGE number of nanostubs were created by dumping various databases into wp, without real loving care of the subjects. I remember this happened to locations in Antarctica (it took lots of work to merge/redirect them into larger features) ; we are still struggling with GNIS dumps of locations which do not exist anywhere but in GNIS; I remember one guy ctearted several dozens 200-character articles on railway stations in several minutes, I guess in a rat race to be the one to create the 1,000,000th Wikipedia article. And so on. So I see nothing wrong in backfiring with massive AfD nominations. --Altenmann >talk 18:19, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But these figure skater articles were not like that. Many were well-developed. There were several prominent editors who created such articles a few years ago. Maybe if these people were still active they would defend their creations.
This is a lesson why you need to write articles for contemporary skaters now and not wait 20 years. Cause in 20 years most of the online sources won't exist anymore, and it will be impossible to prove the people were famous once. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:33, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have added sources to this article. This is the English-language Wikipedia, so sources in languages other than English must include 1) the title translated into English, and b) the language of the source. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:51, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Must include". — That's not a requirement. --Moscow Connection (talk) 23:45, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even when those articles were improved (I improved some of the mass AfD summitted skating bio articles after submission and they were properly cited before the nomination) they still draw attention of the nominator for deletion due to the narrow view of what is considered "notable". That said I'm not sure how these deletions makes a better Wikipedia. The nominator's assertion "No evidence of notability. On-line searches yielded nothing." is inaccurate as sources have been added to the article that are appropriate and as a national champion she passes WP:NSKATE. Nayyn (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Armenia at the 2002 Winter Olympics. Not much coverage to keep as stand alone article. Ramos1990 (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems she passes WP:NSKATE as a champion. Archives908 (talk) 17:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Champion of what?!? Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:53, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Draft

Serbia

Love, Faith, Hope

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG. Was a soft delete back in 2022, recently undeleted without improvement. 3 of the 4 sources in the article do not even mention the subject. I'll quote the previous nominator's (Vacant0) rationale, since it still applies: "I've only found passing mentions such as: attendance of a protest during the 2022 North Kosovo crisis, announcement that they will take part in the 2022 Belgrade City Assembly election (they ended up placing second to last with only 5,000 votes), an anti-government event that was organized by its leader (Nemanja Šarović) and the announcement that Šarović formed this movement. Additionally, this movement has not been represented in any legislature since its foundation, and it seems to entirely be focused on the actions and announcements of its leader (its facebook page can be also seen as proof of this besides these sources that I've listed)." Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Nemanja Šarović: The movement has not received significant coverage in reliable sources. Its activities are mostly tied to its leader Šarović. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:53, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Conservatism, Politics, and Serbia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:18, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Flag of Serbia (Habsburg) (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)

Slovakia

Others

Slovenia

Others

Shortcuts

Spain

Virtway

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

should be deleted due to its promotional tone, lack of reliable citations, questionable notability, and the status of its flagship project, which is considered vaporware. Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 09:02, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Hka-34 Jyli (talk) 09:02, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete. non-notable and lacking in WP:SIGCOV. an audit of the three current citations gives a poor result: [49] and [50]^archive make no mention of virtway. [51] is a simple press release. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty nine (talk) 09:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Technology, Software, and Spain. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Nicholas

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

After reviewing the article it came to my attention that the person this article is about does not meet the notability criteria for creative professionals since:

- There is no readily available evidence to suggest that Anna Nicholas is widely cited by her peers or successors, or that she is considered an "important figure" within the broader literary community.

- It is unlikely that Anna Nicholas has originated a significant new concept, theory, or technique within the literary field. Her work, while potentially popular, does not appear to have revolutionized or significantly altered literary practices.

-While Anna Nicholas has published books, it is questionable whether these works have been the "primary subject" of "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" that meet Wikipedia's standards of notability. Simply having reviews or mentions is insufficient; the reviews must be substantial and from reputable sources. It must be demonstrated that the books have had a significant cultural impact.

- There is no evidence to suggest that Anna Nicholas's works have achieved any of these criteria. Her books do not appear to have become "significant monuments," been part of significant exhibitions, received exceptional critical attention, or been included in notable gallery or museum collections. Fatimald (talk) 05:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, and United Kingdom. Fatimald (talk) 05:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Interestingly there is a recent review of one of her books in the Telegraph[52] but also two recent bylines[53][54] so this cannot be considered an independent source. Doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR and article is largely unchanged from the one she herself originally created 17 years ago. Orange sticker (talk) 08:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Travel and tourism, Spain, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only find the Telegraph review used in the article, not enough to meet AUTHOR. With one or two more book reviews we should have AUTHOR notability, but I don't see any. Oaktree b (talk) 13:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

José Luis Ricón

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

Dubious notability. The Org seems to be the equivalent of a LinkedIn page, and the Future page does not provide any notable information. Many of the citations in the article are not verified in the sources, such as the claim of a "widely cited resource" Longevity FAQ. In addition, I have reason to believe this might be a trolling attempt, due to the creation of a prediction market on if the article will survive to the end of the year (https://manifold.markets/infiniteErgodicity/will-the-wikipedia-article-for-jose) Duckduckgoop (talk) 02:36, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Duckduckgoop (talk) 02:36, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Science, Internet, and Spain. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Sweden

Mohammed Altoumaimi

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

Does not pass any notability criterion. Not reliably sourced D.Lazard (talk) 09:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Mathematics. D.Lazard (talk) 09:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:PROF. Tito Omburo (talk) 09:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article about Mohammed Altoumaimi should be kept, as he meets several notability criteria outlined in Wikipedis guideline on notability for academics (WP:PROF).

To begin with, there is significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. As early as 2009, Altoumaimi was featured in major Swedish national media such as Dagens Nyheter and SVT, where he was recognized as a young mathematical prodigy. This early recognition indicates that his notability is not recent or fleeting.

In addition, he has academic contributions that demonstrate active engagement in research. He has authored peer-reviewed work in the fields of theoretical physics and applied mathematics, including a 2025 publication available on arXiv (arXiv:2502.12205). This shows sustained academic activity and relevance.

Furthermore, Altoumaimi public and academic presence has been consistent for over a decade, satisfying the criterion of enduring notability, as he has remained relevant both in media and in academic circles.

Based on these points, he clearly meets at least two of the WP:PROF criteria:

1. He has made a significant impact in his academic field.

2. He has received substantial coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources.

While the article could benefit from structural improvements and additional citations such as including sections on his biography, academic career, and list of publication it meets Wikipedias standards for notability and should not be deleted. 217.65.132.36 (talk) 10:42, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that he has made a significant impact on his scholarly field. He has not received any coverage in reliable scholarly sources. Tito Omburo (talk) 10:45, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Iraq and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete until RS about this prodigy are found. Xxanthippe (talk) 11:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Mohammed Altoumaimi received substantial coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources in 2009 when, as a 16-year-old Iraqi immigrant in Sweden, he developed a mathematical formula related to Bernoulli numbers. This achievement was verified by Uppsala University senior mathematics lecturer Lars-Åke Lindahl and reported in multiple international news outlets including The Local, Al Arabiya, and UPI.com, satisfying Wikipedia's General Notability Guideline.According to Wikipedia's guidelines, "Notability is not temporary." Altoumaimi established notability in 2009 through significant media coverage of a substantial achievement verified by academic experts, not a trivial or fleeting event.Altoumaimi has continued his academic career with his 2025 publication "A Rigid Beam Acting in the Shearing Manner to the Quasi-Crystalline Half-Space," demonstrating ongoing contribution to mathematics and showing his early promise led to a sustained academic career.His story has significant educational and inspirational value, particularly for young people from immigrant backgrounds, enriching Wikipedia's coverage of diverse contributors to mathematics.I propose the article be retained with improvements to its structure and sourcing, with a potential review in one year to incorporate any new developments in his academic career. Mohammed Altoumaimi clearly satisfied Wikipedia's notability requirements through significant coverage in reliable sources. His continued academic activity and the educational value of his story provide strong grounds for retaining this article. 94.191.137.26 (talk) 19:20, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One fluff article does not satisfy WP:GNG, and professionally he is nowhere near WP:PROF yet. --Elmidae (talk · contribs)
Delete: Definitely not even close to WP:NPROF, and not WP:GNG. His single paper (part of his PhD?) seems to be routine theoretical mechanics, nothing special and not in a high profile journal.Ldm1954 (talk) 01:38, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LLM spam

In my view, Mohammed Altoumaimi meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria, even if some of his academic work has not yet been published in widely recognized journals. The fact that his research is currently available through platforms such as arXiv does not diminish its value. It’s important to recognize that not all scholars or researchers have access to the resources or institutional support necessary to publish in high profile outlets—especially if they aim to maintain a low public profile or come from underrepresented academic environments.

Publishing in a lesser-known outlet does not mean the work is without merit, particularly considering Altoumaimi’s academic background and the attention his story has received in credible media sources. A historical parallel can be drawn to the case of Grigori Perelman, one of the most brilliant mathematicians of our time, who initially published his groundbreaking results on the arXiv rather than in traditional journals. His work was still groundbreaking and ultimately celebrated, despite the unconventional publication route.

In a similar way, Altoumaimi appears to maintain a modest profile, which may explain why more information is not yet publicly available. However, based on what we do know, and the significance of his achievements, the article about him should be retained. 130.237.96.130 (talk) 07:33, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add another perspective regarding Altoumaimi. Im honestly surprised by how some individuals are allowed to remain on Wikipedia despite not even coming close to meeting its notability guidelines, while someone like Altoumaimi is questioned. Ive tried to investigate whether there has been any serious or official criticism of his work, and found none,even though his story has been in the public domain for years and has been followed globally. The absence of controversy is telling.

Attempting to solve a major mathematical problem at the age of 16 is in itself a remarkable achievement. While he may not have “cracked the code” in the traditional sense, he approached the problem in a unique and arguably more complex way than the known solution. That alone should be acknowledged.

Its also possible that Altoumaimi prefers not to seek attention or be in the spotlight, unlike many public figures. Perhaps he values privacy over publicity, and that might explain the lack of widespread recognition. Nevertheless, his story is clearly motivational, especially for young people interested in science and mathematics.

In my opinion, the article should absolutely remain on Wikipedia. At most, the biography could be refined to clarify that he approached an already-solved problem from a different, more challenging angle. But removing the article altogether would ignore the significant impact his story has had and continues to have, as a source of inspiration. 2A00:801:70B:54A2:D850:1C18:9ADA:17A1 (talk) 03:40, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In advocating for the retention of Mohammed Altoumaimi's Wikipedia article, it's essential to consider the nuances of Wikipedia's notability guidelines, particularly as outlined in Wikipedia:Notability (people). These guidelines emphasize that a person is presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the subject.Wikipedia+1Wikipedia+1

Altoumaimi's early recognition in 2009 by reputable Swedish media outlets such as Dagens Nyheter and SVT highlights his prominence as a young mathematical prodigy. This level of coverage suggests that he meets the general notability guideline, which requires significant coverage in reliable sources.Wikipedia

Furthermore, his academic contributions, including a 2025 article available via arXiv (arXiv:2502.12205), demonstrate ongoing engagement in theoretical physics and applied mathematics. While arXiv is a preprint repository and not a peer-reviewed journal, it is widely used in the scientific community for disseminating research findings. Notably, esteemed mathematician Grigori Perelman also utilized arXiv to publish his proof of the Poincaré conjecture, underscoring that the platform can be a legitimate avenue for significant academic contributions. It's important to recognize that the absence of publications in major journals does not inherently diminish the value of one's work. Various factors, such as resource limitations or a preference for privacy, might influence an individual's publication choices. Altoumaimi's decision to maintain a low profile does not negate his achievements or the impact of his work. Moreover, the enduring interest in Altoumaimi's accomplishments over more than a decade indicates sustained relevance, which aligns with the criterion of enduring notability. His story serves as an inspiration to young individuals pursuing mathematics and science, highlighting the importance of recognizing diverse pathways to achievement. 94.191.138.200 (talk) 04:11, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If I may cut short these extended apologias. It does not matter whence "obscurity" arises - a lack of substantial coverage from reliable sources makes a topic unsuitable for a WP article. If Einstein had not received wide recognition, we would not have an article about him, genius or not. If some Eurovision clown gets worldwide coverage, we will have an article. Special pleading need not apply. Second, if you can't be arsed to write your own arguments, and then even leave the ChatGPT links in your text, your contributions are not welcome to this discussion. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:04, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If the work is as important as its proponents claim it will receive hundreds of citations. Currently it has none. We typically expect 1000+ citations for notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:15, 12 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Korv Stroganoff

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

Regional varieties of Stroganoff are already listed in the Beef Stroganoff article. Korv Stroganoff is already mentioned in Beef_Stroganoff#Nordic_countries and its typical ingredients and serving methods are adequately summarised there.

The citations used in this article are also primarily from supermarket websites and cooking recipe blogs; not (WP:RELIABLE). Lea 4545 (talk) 10:00, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Sweden. Lea 4545 (talk) 10:00, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. Revise the information in the Stroganof article instead.Blockhaj (talk)

Keep. From a quick search there appears to be enough coverage in Swedish RS to support notability (and I am not counting any recipes). Remember that article quality is not a reason for deletion. Sjö (talk) 10:45, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To further note, majority of the recipies are from major supermarkets. Also, if i remember correctly, when i made the article i added separate doublets for all claims. So in short, "not WP:reliable" does not apply. Blockhaj (talk) 10:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then Merge: The deletion proposal was not based on subject notability, nor primarily on article quality. The topic is already adequately covered in the Beef Stroganoff article, making a separate page unnecessary. This constitutes a unacceptable type of content fork per WP:REDUNDANTFORK.

Per WP:PAGEDECIDE: "At times it is better to cover a notable topic as part of a larger page about a broader topic, with more context." This applies here, as Korv Stroganoff is a regional variant of Beef Stroganoff and benefits from being presented within the broader context of related variations. Lea 4545 (talk) 12:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Korv Stroganoff only derives from Beef Stroganoff, but it is its own dish. It is a completely different staple in Sweden and Finland. With this logic it makes more sense to merge Haggis into Pölsa, as the former is just a lamb variant of it. Blockhaj (talk) 12:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Korvstroganoff is a separate dish. It has a distinct role in Swedish society (essentially a kids' meal), very different from the role Beef Stroganoff plays in other Western countries. --Soman (talk) 20:41, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bahro Suryoyo

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:N and WP:GNG, search for sources find mostly social media pages that discuss the magazine and others that mention it in passing without much detail (as well as the website for the magazine) Surayeproject3 (talk) 19:40, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Surayeproject3 (talk) 19:40, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:14, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Also, its website has a risky .Nu extension. Bearian (talk) 20:27, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:29, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Switzerland

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. (non-admin closure) Cielquiparle (talk) 13:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Rohr

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

While accomplished, I cannot find enough in-depth coverage to show they meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:30, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 13:37, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I went through the first four pages of googlehits and there is probably something to work with [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] Geschichte (talk) 15:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Rohr is, as the nom said, accomplished, and the reliable sources available from a google search are enough to pass GNG. I agree with Geschicte and support a Keep of this article with a possible nudge to continue work on it.Iljhgtn (talk) 15:33, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources in the comment above seem ok, enough to confirm notability. They're in German but easy enough to translate. Oaktree b (talk) 18:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article now includes coverage from multiple sources covering 15+ years: Tages-Anzeiger (×3), Aargauer Zeitung, SRF, and Schweizer Illustrierte (all WP:RS). The subject’s work as a TV presenter, journalist, photographer, and communications consultant is covered in sufficient depth to meet WP:GNG. HerBauhaus (talk) 14:49, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Others

Flag of Aargau (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)

Turkey

Kurdish unification of 1830

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

This did not happen, there is no mention of this in the sources posted, this page is just an Propaganda.Iranian112 (talk) 18:24, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is certainly a pattern to Battle of Rawandiz (AfD discussion), Draft:Rawandiz revolt, and Draft:Rawandiz Revolt that is framing history through a modern lens; and I see no support in those or other history books for regarding the Soran Emirate as an actual Kurdish unification, especially as they (including Eppel, cited in this article and elsewhere, ironically) record the Botan emirate as being separate. (Eppel, in the earlier 2014 of that chapter, also calls Kor's ambitions "self-centred", not nationalist.) This does seem to be a skewed version of what the books say.
This article creator has a bad habit of not giving page numbers, too. So here some are: ISBN 9780292758131 pp. 53–55; ISBN 9781477311073 pp. 51–54; and ISBN 9781315468402 p.12.
Uncle G (talk) 21:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Middle East. Shellwood (talk) 21:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Metamorfoz

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

Article about an album that fails WP:GNG. It has 36 sources, but all of them are ether unreliable, dead or not related to it at all. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:52, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Turkey. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:52, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@WhoIsCentreLeft yeah? so sabah, hürriyet, radikal, which are major newspapers, are unreliable, and which of the references are unrelated? Just because something is in a language you don't understand, doesn't mean it's unrelated. Use google translate. Link rot is a natural occurrnce on the internet over time (ever checked when this article waswritten?) How about first trying to inform the writer about link rot, before nominating something for delition? This album sold 300,000 copies in Turkey. Tarkan is to date the most sold artist in that country. Which part of the notability requirements does this not meet? Xia ^{talk to me} 06:58, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This album is simply not notable. I checked all the sources cited in this article and none proved its notability. I searched about this album on Google and got zero results. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 10:06, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Come Closer (album)

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

Debut album that fails WP:GNG. I was unable to find any sources about it other than profiles. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:27, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:27, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Baghdad (1821)

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

Amongst the articles mentioned in the "Slicing history into pieces" thread (the two other articles are already nominated here [60] [61]). There is more info about other stuff than the siege itself, the latter which is not even fully sourced. HistoryofIran (talk) 20:26, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Iran, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 20:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Iraq. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Support per nom.

Iranian112 (talk) 20:50, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Ottoman–Iranian War (1821–1823). I'd rather see the article redirected vs. outright deleted. Because it contains a lot of work finding and composing citations and some information not in the main article. It may be useful in the future. Also the redirect itself is worth saving. Also there is useful information in the talk page. -- GreenC 00:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, dear GreenC, we have put a great deal of effort into this page. We have carefully researched the necessary sources, and we have thoroughly discussed the rationale behind this page with you step by step in the "talk" section. Therefore, I strongly oppose the deletion of this article. Anyone who wishes can come and discuss it with me many of the answers people are looking for are already available on the talk page. The Siege of Baghdad article is not a simple or trivial page. It covers a battle that is as crucial and significant as the Battle of Erzurum. Are you seriously considering deleting or turning this historically important article which changed the course of the war into a mere redirect? @HistoryofIran @Iranian112

Apologies if we disturbed you by tagging you, but this is truly an important matter. Wishing you a good day. BEFOR01 (talk) 01:38, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who is "we"? Lectonar (talk) 11:12, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He is referring to himself and the people who took part in developing this page. Klass12345 (talk) 14:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BEFOR01, why are you first opposing this now? You were part of all these discussions [62] [63] [64], all which mentioned that article (and others) getting redirected. I'm not sure what you expected. HistoryofIran (talk) 15:31, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Normally I wouldn't think much about the tone of your message, but why do you evaluate the issues from your own perspective?

We are talking about the Baghdad siege page, if you want, do not deviate from the subject

+Also, I didn't say anything about the redirection of the page, I just wanted to change something wrong about the chronological order in the template. I don't see any controversial issues on those pages you mentioned as 1,2,3. As for Diyala and Mandali, I didn't know about the limit of the number of sources, but now that I know and I have knowledge about the accuracy and logic of the sources, I am trying to delete these pages. You can see what I mean here: here BEFOR01 (talk) 16:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am literally talking about the Baghdad siege, thus I am not deviating from anything, nor is there anything wrong with my tone. Sorry, but judging by this and your past comments, I think there is a language barrier here, so let's just end this discussion of ours here. And as for your comment below, please be aware of WP:BLUDGEON. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:46, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, you can review all my posts in the discussion; I have no objection to that. However, please do not try to minimize or deny a historical fact using such excuses.

If I am the one who really derailed the thread, please respond directly to the arguments in my previous posts. If you cannot refute my responses, then the delete or redirect warning placed on the Siege of Baghdad (1821) article should be removed.

That is not a problem for me, but if you are deliberately biased and trying to minimize the historical significance of the event, then that is something that really needs to be questioned. BEFOR01 (talk) 17:07, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- I agree the article repeats more than necessary about the war, but I don't think that implies the siege is non-notable by any means. Several sources which appear decent (although I don't read Turkish) are cited, and two sections with paragraphs of detail on the siege itself and analysis of it are present. There's too much to merge, and the nominator has not demonstrated that the siege is non-notable -- as such this should have been a merge proposal (to be clear I am also not in support of that). Mrfoogles (talk) 15:24, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The event is not prominent in WP:RS as far as I've seen. The fact that there is little info about the siege itself is pretty concerning in regards to WP:NOTABLE. HistoryofIran (talk) 15:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The siege is probably the second or third most important event during the Ottoman–Iranian War (1821–1823). The main article needs expansion it's way too brief and there is good content/sourcing in the Siege article that can be integrated - also good conversations on the talk page. After that, we will better be able to judge what if anything needs splitting off. I want to do this work of expansion but my "day job" (fixing dead links) has been time consuming. -- GreenC 15:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, stating that the event "does not appear prominently in reliable sources" is quite a subjective assessment when it comes to historical topics like this. We have citations from both Turkish and Persian academic sources, and these sources thoroughly examine the siege’s impact on the course of the war. Such regional sources are indeed within the scope of WP:RS, especially when they are directly related to the geography of the event.

Secondly, you say that "there is little information about the siege," but we've already questioned both the accuracy and logic of that claim in the first paragraph. This siege was a decisive event that directly influenced the outcome of the entire war. Trying to condense such a significant and impactful development into just a few paragraphs in the main article could both disrupt the structure there and diminish the historical importance of the siege itself.

Furthermore, this siege is the second most critical event of the war. We've said this before and we’ll say it again: after Erzurum, it was the most consequential engagement.

In conclusion, if the article's content were truly weak, I would have removed it myself long ago. Instead of rushing into deletion or merging, a more encyclopedic approach would be to improve the article through constructive contributions. BEFOR01 (talk) 16:38, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Ottoman–Iranian War (1821–1823): Reading through the article as it is now carefully it appears there is actually not much in the way of information about what happened during the siege itself, just that it happened. I think it would be better placed in the context as a section in the wider war. Moritoriko (talk) 07:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per HistoryofIran's rationale.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:16, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a vote, it's a discussion. Simply stating “per HistoryofIran” is not a sufficient rationale for deletion. In deletion discussions, contributors are expected to provide their own reasoning. If you believe the article should be deleted, please explain why in your own words so we can have a constructive and meaningful exchange.

Also, I’ve already addressed HistoryofIran’s arguments in detail above particularly regarding the historical significance of the siege and the reliability of the sources cited. If there are no direct rebuttals to those points, then merely echoing someone else’s opinion shouldn’t carry weight in deciding the article’s fate. That’s not in line with an encyclopedic approach. BEFOR01 (talk) 17:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So you want me to copy-paste what HistoryofIran said ? I am not going to repeat his rationale, as I said, I agree with it, end of. By the way, just to let you know, your above comments have not solved anything and I don't agree with your reasoning.You really should take a look at WP:BLUDGEON, as suggested above---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not asking you to copy and paste anything. I’m pointing out that simply saying “I agree” without addressing any specific arguments or providing independent reasoning doesn't help move the discussion forward in a meaningful or policy-aligned way.

+Do you think it's that simple? "Your comments above didn't solve anything" you say

then if you read my comments above in more detail you will understand what I mean. BEFOR01 (talk) 04:11, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're not saying anything other than "Don't bludgeon the process." I'm not trying to force anyone to accept anything. If I were, I would be trying to convince each of you one by one. Don't take this the wrong way if you have a reasonable response, please share it. I've already explained the importance of this page and my reasoning in the talk section, and you're free to review it.

Moreover, my comments are aligned with both WP:RS and WP:N principles. Of course, you're not obligated to agree with me, but in that case, please engage directly with the content of the arguments and base your criticism on clear reasoning. That’s how a healthy consensus is built. BEFOR01 (talk) 04:26, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This siege isn't even mentioned in high quality academic sources, the fact that you said above "This siege was a decisive event that directly influenced the outcome of the entire war." is baseless for the least, if so, then the Ottomans would have won that war or, at least it would have ended inconclusively. Anyway, the lack of academic sources dealing with this so-called siege makes me think that this article is not notable enough.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can check it from my latest notes. Whether it is a well-founded siege or not :) BEFOR01 (talk) 06:20, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Tucker(lists sieges of Baghdad and 1821 isn't shown) and Farmanfarmaian states no siege occurred. The Cambridge History of Iran(Hambly, Gavin R. G), doesn't mention a siege, and neither does The Ottoman-Iranian borderlands: making a boundary, 1843-1914(Sabri Ates). --Kansas Bear 13:09, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, thank you for your message. Why didn't you give the volume or the relevant page in the sources you gave?

+But no problem, I would like to help you with resources objectively.

Historian Sabri Ateş provides a detailed account in The Ottoman-Iranian Borderlands:

“In early October 1821, Dawlatshah moved from Kermanshah… Victorious, he appointed Abdullah Bey Baban and advanced to Baghdad. According to Abbas Amanat, only the formidable city walls and the pleas of Shaikh Musa Najafi stopped him from taking the city. Cevdet Pasha and Longrigg argue that Davud’s strong defense and reconciliation with Mahmud allowed the Ottomans to emerge victorious.” (According to what the book says, this must be it)

— Sabri Ateş, The Ottoman-Iranian Borderlands p.53

This is corroborated by Iranica:

“Dawlatshāh advanced deep into Iraq but was stopped by the formidable walls of Baghdad and dissuaded from taking the city by the intervention of Shaikh Musa Najafi… This campaign ended with the prince’s death from cholera at Ṭāq-e Garrā.”

— Encyclopaedia Iranica, Dawlatshāh Golden word: Baghdad

Kaveh Farrokh writes:

“Mohammad Ali Mirza conquered Sulayméniyah and following the capture of Samarra, besieged Baghdad. Davood Pasha of Baghdad dispatched an emissary to negotiate with Mohammad Ali Mirza. However, cholera had broken out among the Iranian troops, and Mohammad Ali Mirza fell victim to it, dying near the ancient Sassanian site of Ctesiphon on November, 22, 1821”

— Kaveh Farrokh, Iran at War, 1500–1988

And Graham Williamson(Farmanfarmaian) notes:

“In October 1821, after overcoming the Ottoman army in Kurdistan, the Persian army was encamped within a day’s march of Baghdad. Although the city walls were formidable and stores well provisioned, the Pasha was outnumbered and had insufficient cannon to man all the capital’s bastions. Instead, however, of storming the city or enforcing a siege, Mohammad Ali Mirza simply stayed in-situ encamped for some weeks before retiring.”

While Williamson avoids the word "siege", his description encampment right outside Baghdad for weeks after defeating Ottoman forces meets the characteristics of a failed siege attempt.

+Developments such as the preparations for the defense of the city, the triggering of the danger of siege and the withdrawal of the army indicate that there was a de facto (actual) siege.

— Graham Williamson,Farmanfarmaian The Turko-Persian War 1821–1823/War Peace In Qajar Persia p.100

Turkish historian Yılmaz Karadeniz states:

“Iran besieged Baghdad in 1821, pushed by Russia. The siege lasted eight months. Disease and losses forced Abbas Mirza to withdraw.”

— İran Tarihi (1700–1925) p.288

It would be better if you read the sources carefully before commenting on them, sir.

Note: Cambridge History of Iran (Hambly, Gavin R. G) I just can't seem to find this one but it appears instead in the Cambridge-approved Sabri Ateş

Note 2: You added Tucker but you directly searched for "Siege of Baghdad (1821)". (If it didn't come up when you searched for this and you defend this, you need to do a better research, sir.) Do you really plan to find what you're looking for this way? If you used 1821 as the golden word, you would have found what I meant. Page count: 929

Tucker: “1821 Persian forces under Muhammad Ali Mirza attacked in the direction of Baghdad, but a cholera epidemic that also took its command- er's life forced the army to withdraw. Abbas Mirza, however , enjoyed success in Armenia.”

Here BEFOR01 (talk) 06:18, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wendy Hinton

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

Contested PROD. Rationale was: There is no inherent notability for ambassadors. One of the sources deals with Hinton in depth. I couldn't find any other sources that go into some depth. Thus, this person fails notability criteria. Schwede 66 18:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Schwede 66 18:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Does this not meet NPOL? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 20:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. There is no inherent notability for ambassadors. If that's changed, please show me where that's documented, Zanahary. Schwede 66 20:16, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is an ambassador not a politicians who has held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 20:20, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. Schwede 66 05:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ambassadors are not politicians, in democratic countries they are not elected representatives. They are simply employees of a government of the day and can be considered civil servants. LibStar (talk) 07:36, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ambassadors are not inherently notable, many have been deleted. It needs to meet WP:BIO which this one doesn't. LibStar (talk) 23:37, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per LibStar's comment. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 07:25, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: More potential sources appear to exist at the Ukrainian version. Not !voting but that may be worth investigating. Mach61 16:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Erzurum (1821)

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

Article subject already discussed in the ottoman Iranian war article. Insanityclown1 (talk) 01:21, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Could easily blank and redirect this instead of AFD.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 01:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This battle was important in the Ottoman–Iranian War (1821–1823). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iranian112 (talk • contribs)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Iran, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:10, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Here is the link of the thread [65]. Another relevant link [66]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Current state of the article is atrocious. My searching turned up nothing except for what seem to be mirrors of old versions of this page. There is no useful information to move to the main page about this war. Moritoriko (talk) 07:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Insanityclown1, can you provide a link to the article you are referring to? This should be done automatically in order to easily allow participants to check on your argument so they don't have to go searching for it. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
see comment provided by HistoryofIran. Insanityclown1 (talk) 03:10, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative list of World Heritage Sites in Turkey

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

I think this should be merged with the List of World Heritage Sites in Turkey, as with other country lists. Leo^talk 20:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So why didn't you do that then? The administrator deletion tool forms no part of the article merger procedure. This is Articles for deletion. It's in the name. Ironically, article merger takes one fewer edits than an AFD nomination. Uncle G (talk) 20:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Uncle G, I just did it but I'm not sure if I did it right. Leo^talk 22:13, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 21:00, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Tentative list of World Heritage Sites in Turkey. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the article to itself? mwwv ^converse∫_edits 11:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And redirect it to itself! Solves all your problems at once! —Tamfang (talk) 03:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Calling it Tentative in the very title should mean a speedy move to user space. —Tamfang (talk) 03:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian violence in the Ottoman Empire

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

This is blatant propaganda that utilizes almost exclusively Turkish government or gov-linked or denialist sources in order to "counter" to the Armenian Genocide "claims" as Turkey sees it. --Երևանցի ^talk 16:24, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Armenia, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 16:29, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT; from the very first sentence written to push a propaganda narrative, as described in our Featured Article Armenian genocide denial. "There was no genocide, and if there was the Armenians were to blame" in Wikipedia article form. The article creator should be up for a CTOPIC TBAN for this intentional disinformation. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Arguments provided by OP and the user above do not meet WP:DEL-REASON. This article is based on a wide array of scholarly, academic sources from English, Turkish and even German. WP:BIASEDSOURCES guideline allows partisan sources as long as they are used properly. Even if we were to assume that an article is biased, this is not a valid reason to delete it. The proper action to take is to determine why it is biased and fix the errors. Furthermore, contrary to what has been suggested by others, this article does not in any way claim that there was no Armenian genocide, just like Palestinian political violence does not negate the existence of Gaza genocide.--Wallis sabiti (talk) 17:47, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your article was already deleted several times for similar reasons. You engage in POV pushing, which is against wikipedia rules. It is not the first time I see you doing this. Athoremmes (talk) 17:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You support the Treaty of Sevres and revisionist United Armenia project on your user page. You are the real POV pusher. Wallis sabiti (talk) 18:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good for me, how that relates to topic discussed? I published it on my personal page, not on mainspace, you are free to do it as well. Athoremmes (talk) 00:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete , it was already discussed in previous AfD, the article is written in vague language, sources are biased, etc Athoremmes (talk) 17:53, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BIASEDSOURCES are allowed. Wallis sabiti (talk) 18:05, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These aren't just biased sources, they're unreliable. The Turkish article was deleted a few days ago. tr:Ermenilerce_Türklere_yapılan_katliamlar. ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:23, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That article was deleted because there was already an article for the Armenian rebellions, the log states on Trwiki. If you think sources are unreliable, you should take this to WP:RSN. Wallis sabiti (talk) 18:30, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And why is that? Because mainstream scholarship does not recognize "Armenian violence in the Ottoman Empire" as a thing. It's nothing but cheap propaganda. ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Type "Armenian terrorism" on Google scholar and you will see how scholarship recognizes it. Wallis sabiti (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Armenian terrorism" ≠ "organized massacres of Turks by Armenian revolutionaries", let alone of 518,105. ----Երևանցի ^talk 18:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From 1910 to 1922, Armenian bandits had killed 523,955 Ottoman Muslims.^[1] (p. 92) Wallis sabiti (talk) 19:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yeah, per "International Law Expert" Sadi ÇAYCI in the "Review of Armenian Studies" with a reference to the "State Archives of the Turkish Prime Ministry". sounds as reliable as it can possibly get. ----Երևանցի ^talk 19:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What previous AfDs? This is the first one with this title so they must be under some other title. Nil Einne (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nil Einne The first version of the article was called "Armenian atrocities", see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armenian atrocities. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:27, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Heads up Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zenzyyx. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on WP:TNT grounds. I have no doubt that the article does make reference to some notable atrocities, but the article would require a tremendous amount of reworking and in-depth verification of the sources in order to correct the intense NPOV issues. Flip^and Flopped ツ 01:28, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Over reliance on Turkish government sources which violates NPOV. (Cont.) reference: Harbord, James G. (1920). Conditions in the Near East. Report of the American military mission to Armenia, page 35 is a misrepresentation since it doesn't properly cite where this information originated(page 37, Moustapha Kemal Pasha). So an Ottoman/Turkish source disguised as an unbiased "Western" source. --Kansas Bear 01:31, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and rationale provided. Major bias and non-neutral sourcing. Archives908 (talk) 16:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ “TERRORISM AND ASYMMETRIC THREAT: ACTIVITIES AGAINST TURKEY, FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE 20th CENTURY TO THE PRESENT (Armenian Terror Activities and PKK Terror Organization Activities since 1915)”. Review of Armenian Studies, no. 18 (May 2008): 89-99.

Delete - this is genocide denialism, sock puppetry, and Soapboxing at its worst - and at the worst possible time, when billionaires are trying to play gotcha with us so that they can take away our charitable status. Bearian (talk) 03:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as per nom and others. Let’s be honest, this is one of the best state-sponsored efforts on Wikipedia. Charlie (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:FRINGE full of genocide denial. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 02:07, 11 April 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 delete‎. ✗plicit 12:02, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman occupation of southern Iranian lands (1821)

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

Another non-WP:NOTABLE article part of this "Slicing history into pieces" trend. In that section, I originally proposed to simply redirect this to its main article Ottoman–Iranian War (1821–1823) and move its sourced content over there (another user suggested a merge, same same I guess). However, now taking another look at this article and the war article, I guess a deletion nomination is for the best, since this event is described in mere 2 lines in the "Ottoman invasion of Qajar lands" section, which lacks context. The "Qajar counterattack" section (not event part of this event) is already somewhat described in the war article. And most importantly of all, there is no special event named "Ottoman occupation of southern Iranian lands" in WP:RS, this is a invented name. HistoryofIran (talk) 11:41, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? You are angry with me and want to be hostile to me. Let me create my page. Don't worry about me. I have read more about the Qajar-Ottoman war than you, don't worry. Eminİskandarli (talk) 12:07, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article on the Ottoman–Iranian War isn't particularly long and doesn't need splitting, the current sourcing situation doesn't justify a standalone article either, and the article is filled with information about the war in general and not the one battle it is (according to the lead paragraph) supposed to be about. Cortador (talk) 12:49, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Iran, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 12:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I do not know what kind of personal feuding appears to be going on above, but this article after review is lacking in the depth of coverage to have a article unto itself. Merge the content if needed and do not split for the sake of it. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete merge any useful content first. This article and some others were created by way of an offline dispute (so I was told). I'd been waiting for the editors to burn out, then sort it out. Yet, with bad faith disputes, all roads lead to AfD, ANI, blocks. Think about a detailed featured article on the Ottoman–Iranian War (1821–1823) and don't worry about splitting off separate articles. This will require you to work together, and not create safe spaces based on the infobox |result= field, with occasional raids into opposing articles. It's been art imitating real events. -- GreenC 16:54, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Support per nom. Insanityclown1 (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Support per nom. Kajmer05 (talk) 18:21, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Support per nom. Iranian112 (talk) 13:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This article appears to just be repeating information already in the Ottoman–Iranian War (1821–1823) article with no notable additions. Unlike the Siege of Baghdad article this one doesn't seem to be a specific event either for a redirect. Moritoriko (talk) 07:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The sources cited demonstrate that Ottoman forces did occupy a portion of Iran in 1821, but the discussion is all in the context of summarizing the events of the Ottoman–Iranian War (1821–1823). It needs to be the occupation specifically which passes WP:GNG: i.e. in-depth discussion of it beyond the fact that "for a brief period during 1821, x soldiers occupied y land and this is what happened". WP:NEVENT is in this sense not passed. Flip^and Flopped ツ 22:08, 10 April 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.

Ramadan in Turkey

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

This is one of a series of articles by the same editor; I'd bundle them if I knew how. All the articles are like this, they are not about Ramadan customs peculiar to one country but are merely descriptions of common customs. The long list of foods (I've edited out the more preposterous bits) are likewise merely lists of commonn foods of the country, such as (in this case) kebaps. TheLongTone (talk) 14:09, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Islam, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 14:59, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Prob delete - seems to me that the topic likely is notable in the sense that there probably are distinctive Turkish cultural practices during this religious time. But I'm also not convinced that the page, as it is currently framed, addresses that. Maybe someone else could try again later and make a better stab. JMWt (talk) 15:53, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and do the same with all the other articles (or at least draftify). Agree with nom and JMWt that, from what I know about Ramadan and Turkish culture and from looking at the sources, much of the content is pretty generic and not necessarily specific to Turkey. The sources are not the highest quality don't really specify what makes Turkish observances unique among countries. Obviously social visits and common dinners are not any different from elsewhere. The author just translated this from Arabic wiki, but it's pretty poor writing to say lentil soup or lahmacun are Ramadan food when Turks eat these every day (if I'm wrong, the article should be clearer). Ramadan#Cultural practices is quite short and should be expanded to cover the instances where there are significant practices that may not be universal, perhaps expanded to a Ramadan by country page or similar that puts differences in context, but not standalone articles. I mean, Ramadan in the United States does have a couple US-specific facts, but then generic crap that there are Tarawih prayers just like everywhere else! Reywas92^Talk 17:25, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This article have been created as part of the Wiki Loves Ramadan Editathon. The articles hav been created in various languages in addition to English. Tuhin (talk) 17:50, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The topic is covered in many English-language books, not all of which are accessible through Google Books, but here are a few: How to Be Amazing at Speaking Turkish: Mastering the Heart of Türkiye [67], beginning of Chapter 7; Intellectuals in the Modern Islamic World: Transmission, Transformation, Communication [68] (the index shows that Ramadan in Turkey is covered on page 298, which is not part of the preview); World and Its Peoples Volume 1 [69] (again, the index lists Ramadan in Turkey on page 835, which is not shown in the preview). This book Introduction to Ramadan [70] may not be reliable (it looks self-published) but has info about Ramadan in Turkey which could be used to search for other sources (eg lighting traditional Ottoman lanterns apparently called fenerbahcesi). There are also several articles and chapters - "Celebratıon of Ramadan: The Case of Turkey" [71], "Does Ramadan Affect Happiness? Evidence from Turkey" [72]; "Aspects of Underlying Ramadan Consumption Patterns in Turkey" [73]; "Evaluation of the impact of the month of Ramadan on traffic accidents" [74]; "Can Religiosity be Sensed with Satellite Data? An Assessment of Luminosity during Ramadan in Turkey" [75]; etc. The topic is clearly notable - I don't think the fact that this article could be improved and expanded is a reason to delete it. I note that this article has been translated from the corresponding article in Arabic. Turkish Wikipedia seems not to have a specific article about Ramazan in Türkiye, but the article on Ramazan has some info specific to Turkey. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep; Ramadan holds significant cultural and religious importance in Turkey, with unique traditions like Mahya, special communal prayers, and festive street celebrations. The article provides valuable insights into the social, cultural, and religious aspects of Ramadan, reflecting the impact on daily life and tourism in Turkey. Deleting this article would remove important information about a key cultural practice in Turkey, and it should be preserved and expanded. Also supported with Reliable Sources and passing WP:GNG. 1947inYamama (talk) 10:53, 10 April 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE ~SG 5536B 00:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:SPINOFF. There is content of encyclopedic value about this topic (i.e. discussion of Ramadan in Turkey within reliable sources, thanks to RebeccaGreen for that research). I imagine the same is true of some other, but not all, countries. The question then becomes, "where do we put this information"? It's notable enough to pass WP:GNG, so it should go somewhere, but if we crammed it all in to the Ramadan article, that would create both WP:UNDUE and WP:SIZE concerns. As such, I think a keep as per WP:SPINOFF is in order. Flip^and Flopped ツ 21:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Ukraine

Mykhailo Tkachuk

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

I'm a bit unsure of this one, as he played mainly in the 1990s and had a rather long career, but in all four related languages, I could only find this, which is hardly WP:SIGCOV. I could find literally nothing else—hardly even a mention of his existence. The article has also been a stub for going on 10 years now. I figured that it would be worth putting it up for discussion here, as it doesn't appear as though this article is improvable without seeking out physical archives for information—and even then it's not guaranteed. I'm curious if anyone else can find anything on this player. Anwegmann (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete The uk-wiki article is much more detailed, but it seems that this person does not satisfy the notability threshold for sportsmen, as well as it fails WP:SIGCOV. --Altenmann >talk 01:53, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Moldova, Russia, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 17:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Illya Kryvoruchko

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

Co-authored one book, which gave a couple of mentions in local news. There are not enough reliable sources to confirm notability. The article was deleted on Ukrainian Wikipedia. Renvoy (talk) 08:39, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Renvoy (talk) 08:39, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Ukraine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved to draft and asked for speedy deletion. I think that you don't need to spend some time for discussion. Ілля Криворучко (talk) 01:00, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All of that has been reverted as completely inappropriate. -- Whpq (talk) 01:24, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser note the creator of the article, Bogdan678, has been blocked as a Confirmed sock of Ілля Криворучко, who commented above.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:02, 9 April 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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 12:05, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Voice of Peace (Ukraine)

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

No claim to any notability. Fails WP:N. Deleted in Ukrainian Wikipedia. Mitte27 (talk) 10:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Ukraine. Mitte27 (talk) 10:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 12:07, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LEZO (rap group)

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

No claim to any notability. Fails WP:N. Deleted in Ukrainian Wikipedia. Mitte27 (talk) 10:46, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Ukraine. Mitte27 (talk) 10:46, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:52, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Couldn't find find anything solid searching the word "ЛЕЗО" and their albums writing them down in Ukrainian. Searched google news, proquest, and google books. LastJabberwocky (talk) 08:26, 12 April 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.

REDCLIFFE Partners

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

Repost of previously deleted and salted material: WP:Articles for deletion/Redcliffe Partners * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Companies, and Ukraine. Shellwood (talk) 17:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of the sources cited: 6 are press releases published by the EBA, 2 are press releases published by the American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine, 2 are press releases on the company's own WWW site, 1 is a press release published by the USIDFC, 1 is a press release on the company's LinkedIn page, 1 is a listing page that is empty, 1 the Financial Times is behind a paywall, 1 is a law firm directory listing, 2 are press releases/autobiography by Clifford Chance, 3 are ranked directories of companies, 3 are shortlistings for awards (not actually winning them), 1 is an interview published by a marketing consultancy, 2 are dead links, 1 is a press release on gazeta.ua, 2 are ranking listings and an interview on yur-gazeta.com, 1 is a list of corporate sponsors of an event, 1 simply mentions that the firm handled a contract, 2 are page not founds, 3 are about law and business practice in Ukraine in general (2 not even mentioning this company, the other quoting its CEO), 1 is about a person who worked at the company applying for another position, 4 are CEE Legal Matters recycling press releases, 2 are CEE Legal Matters covering itself, 1 is CEE Legal Matters interviewing executives, 2 are CEO interviews by the Kyiv Post, 1 is a recycled press release by the Kyiv Post, 1 is a corporate puff piece in Comments.UA.
There is not a single reliable in-depth on-point independent source in the lot of them. This is egregious corporate puffery. Delete.
Uncle G (talk) 22:19, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This article was likely created in an attempt to evade the salting at Redcliffe Partners. This version should have been drafted and submitted it via WP:AFC, where a discussion on the article's merits could have properly occurred. Also importantly, the article fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG -- this is obvious from the above analysis of sources by Uncle G. - tucoxn\^talk 11:10, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I did find Kyivpost, and partly Comments and Gazeta.ua have the decent coverage, but it's true that interviews and paid placements are not included here. I think more sources exist, given the vast activity of the law firm at home. Unicorbia (talk) 14:14, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:56, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: fails WP:NCORP and WP:N and was previously salted. Brenae wafato (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as one of the largest law firm in Ukraine with good coverage (both in law-focused and general media), huge government related topics involved.--OatPancake (talk) 14:03, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: With the exception of the Kyiv Post piece, I agree fully with Uncle G's source analyis and see no pass on WP:NCORP. The capitalization in the title is clear SALT evasion, and if page creator wants to recreate a page on a SALTed topic, a WP:DRV is the first step. Given this effort at evasion, I would support SALTing the all-caps title as well. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:24, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep hmm. looks suspcious but when to dig deeper it likely meets Ncorp as the major law firm working on the big deals of the government and has so-so media coverage in the national press and government papers. I suggest, not all sources may be found online, as it changed the name (NEXIST). Mozzcircuit (talk) 16:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth noting that all but one of the "Keep" !voters are very new users, and all of the "Delete" !voters are long-established users. That's suspicious. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:22, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

United Kingdom

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United Kingdom

Yugoslavia

Others

[1] “TERRORISM AND ASYMMETRIC THREAT: ACTIVITIES AGAINST TURKEY, FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE 20th CENTURY TO THE PRESENT (Armenian Terror Activities and PKK Terror Organization Activities since 1915)”. Review of Armenian Studies, no. 18 (May 2008): 89-99.

[2] “TERRORISM AND ASYMMETRIC THREAT: ACTIVITIES AGAINST TURKEY, FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE 20th CENTURY TO THE PRESENT (Armenian Terror Activities and PKK Terror Organization Activities since 1915)”. Review of Armenian Studies, no. 18 (May 2008): 89-99.

[1]

[1]