Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Minnesota

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Minnesota. 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|Minnesota|~~~~}} 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 Minnesota. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

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

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

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

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Minnesota/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Minnesota

Humboldt Industrial Area, Minneapolis

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

Non-notable neighborhood. Cites a database entry, a blog post, and two passing mentions. Neighborhoods don't generally have inherent notability, and this one doesn't even have residents. Could reasonably redirect to the broader community of Camden, Minneapolis. — Moriwen (talk) 18:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. — Moriwen (talk) 18:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Camden, Minneapolis. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 21:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is an officially designated neighborhood in Minneapolis by the City of Minneapolis. It is part of a complete series of articles on all official neighborhoods. Minnemeeples (talk) 02:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep There's little about this neighbourhood, and it does need to pass GNG. However, there's not nothing about this neighbourhood, including significant coverage in at least one book and a couple mentions in scholarly articles. The question is really do we redirect or do we keep a full set of the official neighbourhoods in this city? I think both are justifiable - GNG is questionable but not at zero, a redirect would destroy the fact every other neighbourhood has an article (though it's possible some others may need to be redirected as well). I'm erring on the side of keeping. SportingFlyer T·C 23:57, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chocolate crinkle

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

I came across this page yesterday refbombed with recipe blogs. I looked for better sources to replace them and could only find two sources with sigcov: Metroscene mag and Field Guide to Cookies. I've since looked closer at Metroscene Mag and see they identify as a blog, leaving only one source contributing to GNG.
ATDs: (1) Redirect to Filipino cuisine where they are mentioned. An expansion would give undue weight, they do not appear particularly important to Filipino cuisine. (2) Merge to Filipino-American cuisine: I disapprove of this. The article is currently scoped to Filipino food in America (i.e. food of Filipino Americans) and would be out of scope. (3) Redirect to list of cookies: Oppose a merge as the criteria for inclusion is implicitly "meets GNG". Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 05:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philippines and Minnesota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Greenlee

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

All I was able to find on this basketball player was this interview with the subject and this interview with his parents, which I don't believe warrant a standalone article. JTtheOG (talk) 07:32, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, North Macedonia, Florida, and Minnesota. JTtheOG (talk) 07:32, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not seeing sufficient independent SIGCOV to pass WP:NSPORT/WP:GNG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There appears to be very little coverage of this individual beyond primary sources Garsh (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (with work) - May meet notability due to FAU Final Four run. 1. trivial mention. 2. Televion interview. 3. Good source, notable mention. 4. Half discusses career, in short WPTV article. 5. Trivial mention, part of team that went to final 4 and contributed as a player. 6. Trivial mention in indep.article. 7. Interview (uni page)

Wq4m820 (talk) 21:14, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Found some coverage at [[1]], [[2]], and [[3]]. Let'srun (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- 1: team-specific microblog (Owls247.com), author graduated from the same uni in 2023, also just 3 sentences of direct coverage
- 2: routine interview from unreliable source (WP:SPORTSKEEDA), also just 2 sentences of direct coverage
- 3: routine coverage from a reliable source
JTtheOG (talk) 20:27, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elixir Press

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

Does not pass WP:NCORP. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Companies. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Colorado and Minnesota. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:37, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - searched the typical WP:BEFORE places, newspapers.com, and PressReader - didn't find anything more in-depth than mentions. No inherited notability from association w/ notable writers, and no clear merge/redirect target. Zzz plant (talk) 01:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is an small, independent press publishing poetry and literary fiction. These publications are not often covered in mainstream press, yet their publications play a role in literary communities. Curious why, with public funding of arts largely stripped in the U.S., librarians being fired, this is the right time to delete a small press from Wikipedia? 174.238.164.181 (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has always required that topics be notable as established via WP:RS. This article was created by an WP:SPA (which usually indicates they likely had a very close connection to Elixir Press) almost 8 years ago. It wasn't appropriate to publish articles on non-notable topics back then, either. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - my 20-minute search for references came up empty. Note that there is another, unrelated press named "Golden Elixir Press". (Note: I think this argument is from User:A. B. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 23 May 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Yes, that was me. Thanks for signing for me. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:18, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing in terms of referencing that would support notability. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is "Golden Elixir Press" a notable press by these standards? 63.135.182.71 (talk) 12:20, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure given the current referencing although it does seem to be the primary/original publisher of translated copies of several notable Taoist texts. Whether or not it is notable is irrelevant per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep— many of the authors who have been published by Elixir Press continue to be active and are producing new works. Because of the nature of Elixir’s work as an independent press focused in part on debut authors, several authors may have been lesser known at the time of their publication, but have grown in notability. Agree that to focus on the possible deletion of an article on an independent press is particularly troubling when literature and the arts are being devalued at large. 64.135.133.153 (talk) 22:59, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Press itself isn't going away, nor are the authors or published works. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of notable topics as established by reliable sources, which this article has always lacked going back for eight years now. If the argument is that it enhances this specific press or helps them maintain visibility, that is directly contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:53, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree--it is troubling given premier role this press plays and context: current state of the arts/Wikipedia's purpose/the need for public support of poetry even if things were glorious. It is one of a few presses that new poets DREAM their work will be published by. People in the poetry world look to it too, to identify and read up and coming writers. And they make beautiful books also an endangered art. KEEP! 2601:19B:4102:1370:7097:75E6:4823:96F8 (talk) 15:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep--This is an established small press offering a well known first book prize, which is often won by writers who go on to greater fame. Worth keeping as a listing if you are interested in accurate info about literary publishing, small presses or writers in America. Poems published by this press have been featured on Poetry Daily, The Slowdown and more. 73.61.242.125 (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment given that these IPs are all making the name (non-policy based) argument, have all never edited before, all geolocate to one of two of the same regions, and have highly specific and unusual concerns, I worry that there may be WP:CANVASSing going on here. I ask any closer to take that into consideration. Thanks! PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor Kraemer

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

While the band this individual is a member of is notable, the individual is not notable themselves outside of the band at this present time. All current information in the article is, or can be, covered in the band article. Andise1 (talk) 19:51, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Minnesota. Shellwood (talk) 20:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Vial (band). Bearian (talk) 03:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per WP:BANDMEMBER. Rift (talk) 03:26, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Hoping for further comments to highlight whether it is a redirect or not? All other suggestions with explanantions are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HilssaMansen19 (talk) 21:57, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Vial (band) —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 19:28, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson Kreuser

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

Does not meet WP:BIO. Sources cited are several database entries, a paid publicity announcement, and a single local news announcement of a transfer. News search turns up a few mentions of his name in lists of players, but no in-depth coverage. — Moriwen (talk) 01:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, Minnesota, and North Dakota. — Moriwen (talk) 01:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - is better known as “Rocky Kreuser” in the USA. When you search that, looks borderline keep/delete so will do a thorough review later. Rikster2 (talk) 22:18, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No significant coverage/notability. JohnMizuki (talk) 07:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minnesota Proposed deletions