Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Texas

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

Purge page cache

watch

Texas

Everything Is A OK: A Dallas, TX Punk Documentary

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

Fails WP:NFILM DonaldD23 talk to me 10:34, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Music, United States of America, and Texas. DonaldD23 talk to me 10:34, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I couldn't find anything out there other than what's already in the article. I did add some content and an interview in hopes of finding more, but again, nothing. If we had a good redirect target I suppose it could redirect there, but List of documentary films specifies that they must be notable films and I've never had any sort of answer on whether or not we could add and redirect films to the given film's year specific page for List of American films. So with no other alternatives that I can see, as the director doesn't appear to pass NCREATIVE and we have no page on the punk rock scene in Dallas, this will have to be a delete on my end. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Antioch Church, Texas

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

Yes, I’m AFDing myself. This article most likely violates a clause of WP:NGEO; "Settlements are not to be inferred from the presence of post offices, schools, churches, or other such facilities, as these often are found in isolation."

The thing is, the inference comes from a trusted source (TSHA; see WP:Reliable Sources/Noticeboard#Handbook of Texas). Should the article be considered unnotable from the incorrect basis of an otherwise trusted source? Roasted (talk) 04:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Roasted (talk) 04:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion, since you are the sole contributor to this page, and you have requested deletion, this page is eligible for WP:G7. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Raj Iyer

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

Non-notable businessman. Autobiographical, promotional page akin to a LinkedIn profile, which Wikipedia is not. Undeclared WP:COI. Fails WP:ANYBIO. Cabrils (talk) 01:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Military, Tamil Nadu, Michigan, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:29, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16 Entertainment

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

Its founder Alex Wilhelm is notable, but this company of his has no significant coverage in WP:RS. Hmr (talk) 17:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Companies. Hmr (talk) 17:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spurs Sports & Entertainment

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

The holding company is not-notable and fails WP:NCORP. The article is primarily content about the San Antonio Spurs, not the holding company, then a WP:SYNTHed-together reporting of the holding company's portfolio. Longhornsg (talk) 17:18, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Sports, Basketball, and Texas. Longhornsg (talk) 17:18, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - sports teams holding companies often are notable. Doing a before search brings up many hits for the company. Mostly books related to sports management. But I agree, the article should be redone to be less focused on the Spurs. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 18:02, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hits yes, but it's WP:ROUTINE coverage, which is what I found in my before. Are the cites in the books WP:SIGCOV of SS&E specifically? Longhornsg (talk) 18:24, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some books have had multiple pages dedicated to SS&E, such as these, and they are national authors too rather than local San Antonio coverage.

https://books.google.com/books?id=C9SbUYGyCvcC&pg=PA335&dq=Spurs+Sports+%26+Entertainment&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiinI7vwMSNAxXTPUQIHcnLDN8Q6AF6BAgMEAM

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Transforming_San_Antonio/-ETpCAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Spurs+Sports+%26+Entertainment&pg=PA180&printsec=frontcover

https://books.google.com/books?id=gVlkCQAAQBAJ&pg=PP3&dq=Spurs+Sports+%26+Entertainment&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiinI7vwMSNAxXTPUQIHcnLDN8Q6AF6BAgNEAM

https://books.google.com/books?id=ZSziAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA6&dq=Spurs+Sports+%26+Entertainment&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwijo4DawcSNAxWgO0QIHftkCnw4ChDoAXoECAUQAw ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 20:43, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Companies, Football, and Ice hockey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:30, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The sources present in the article already demonstrates WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 02:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This just meets WP:GNG. I actually do think that content like this article, Green Bay Packers, Inc., and so on would be better contextualized in the team's article, but I don't see a basis in policy to delete them, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: References used in this article demonstrate the notability of the subject. Passes WP:GNG. AndySailz (talk) 09:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Possible keep. This source on Forbes is independent and reliable and counts towards GNG. this source is secondary and onpy partially contributes to GNG. The remaining sources are passing mentions, blogs, or not independent. Overall sourcing needs improvement. Flibirigit (talk) 11:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 15:50, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show notability. Giant Snowman 15:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Several articles are present that will establish notability.Goodboyjj (talk) 06:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - And I mean weak. Holding companies typically are not notable as its their holdings that normally generate the WP:ORGCRIT needed for notability and notability would not be inherent simply because its the parent. However, the fact it gets attention in numerous books would push this to notability for me. Note that the Forbes reference would fall under WP:FORBESCON so I would not consider it for notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:24, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Levi Carter

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

Article has bunch of sources but none is WP:RS. They are press releases, primary sources and bookselling websites. Fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO despite the bunch of sources. Mekomo (talk) 07:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article as it stands is promotional garbage, and the creator Dogimarket has been flagged as a potential sockpuppet of a paid editing service (although, at time of writing, the investigation has not concluded, and the history of those socks is extremely convoluted). Jpatokal (talk) 11:00, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Flowery promotional language, lack of any coverage outside of PR items... [1] is only one of two hits in Gnews, and it's a PR item. No book reviews found for his book... The likely sock puppet author is another red flag. I see no claim at notability, very PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 13:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Mooonswimmer 17:49, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I thank everyone contributing their thoughts regarding this nomination.

Currently, I am working on the article by removing promotional language and incorporating independent, third-party references consistent with Wikipedia content policies, especially WP:NPOV and WP:GNG.

Regarding notability, Sterling Staffing Solutions, Stephen Carter’s company, has prominently featured on the Inc. 5000 list several times, which is an unaffiliated notable recognition. His co-authored business book also published by ForbesBooks, a noted imprinted business publisher, adds to the list. There further exist non-partisan media coverage of his youth entrepreneurship non-profit initiatives in Click2Houston, Defender Network, and PRWeb.

I appreciate the concern regarding possible sockpuppetry. I can assure you that does not concern me; I do not belong to any paid editing companies, nor am I a sockpuppet account. The edits are made in good faith and with the goal of improving the encyclopedia.

I would like to request the chance to update the article as explained above prior to the deletion decision being finalized.

— Dogimarket (talk) 22:46, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you state for the record if you have any WP:COI for Carter? It's an interesting choice of first article to create, especially given that your previous edit history consists of mostly adding references to obscure species of beetles. Jpatokal (talk) 02:24, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jpatokal Thanks for your message. In response to your question: I have no (WP:COI) on the matter of the Carter article. My contributions are entirely in good faith using only sources that are reliable and citable following Wikipedia's core content standards such as WP:NPOV and WP:V.

And speaking of subject matter – editors are not bound by previous projects. Wikipedia is all about branching out into areas nobody else is doing, and the creation of new articles, is best judged on it's merit and actual content, not who created it.

Willing to meet any content-wise objections with thought and consideration

—Dogimarket (talk) 06:40, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT. At best, the subject is marginally notable. Anything associated with Forbes for the past 10 to 12 years has been considered deprecated. It's not worth our time trying to rescue it. Bearian (talk) 01:23, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Vanity spam. Gheus (talk) 23:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scurlock Foundation

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

This page could easily be contained by Eddy C. Scurlock, if there's anything extra to add here. It lacks WP:SIGCOV + requires additional sourcing for the claims on the page currently. 30Four (talk) 07:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, Science, United States of America, and Texas. 30Four (talk) 07:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Animal, Health and fitness, Religion, and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect. Mccapra (talk) 13:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively and redirect. Bearian (talk) 01:18, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

VFairs

AfDs for this article:

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

I draftified this because the original version was purely based on press releases. It was "improved" with other sources, but when the first source gives a 404 ([2]), as does the WSJ one[3], and I see a source like this one, I don't think it is worth keeping the article or the editor involved (note both the names of the writers and the ISBN):

Smith, John; Doe, Jane (2023). "Key Players in Virtual Event Platforms". The Evolution of Event Technology. Tech Press. pp. 112–115. ISBN 978-0123456789.

And then we have actual, working sources that don't even mention VFairs[4] Fram (talk) 07:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Companies, Software, and Texas. Fram (talk) 07:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Jennings

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

Subject doesn't meet the WP:SPORTSBASIC due to a lack of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Let'srun (talk) 14:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Colorado, and Texas. Let'srun (talk) 14:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 22:48, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:03, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 09:05, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Emerson Nieto

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:SPORTSCRIT due to a lack of significant coverage. The only references in the article are primary and I couldn't find anything elsewhere to support notability. Let'srun (talk) 14:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Florida, Indiana, and Texas. Let'srun (talk) 14:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:59, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:58, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep subject looks notable based on Indyeleven.com. (talk) 00:13, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mysecretgarden, Indyeleven.com is his team's website. That is not an independent source. JoelleJay (talk) 01:02, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, didn't notice that. Changing my vote to DELETE. Mysecretgarden (talk) 03:34, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 11:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isaiah Martin

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

Delete. The article says he is a candidate in a special election and a political advisor. Candidates are not inherently notable or inherently generic. I see nothing about his 2025 candidacy or his 2024 almost candidacies that would meet any sort of ten year test of significance. Senior advisor is a vague title and one that almost certainly does not apply to Martin. He does not show up on Legistorm, or in any FEC disbursements, and Houston Landing describes him as a former intern in October 2023.

The only other area I want to preemptively address is the sources in the article mention that he has a presence on TikTok. WP:ENTERTAINER lays out that either 1) the person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or 2) the person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. The first one is not relevant. The second one I do not feel he meets. Numerous people confront and/or make fun of MAGA. There is nothing about the content or having 275,000 followers with 20,000 views per week (per a citation in the article) that meets #2. Yes, there was a keep vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kat Abughazaleh, but that sourcing was beyond the mere existence of her social media following (which is larger than Martin's) and her candidacy.

This page should be deleted due to some combination of WP:TOOSOON, WP:BLP1E, WP:NOPAGE, and not meeting WP:GNG. I am agnostic as to a redirect to 2025 Texas's 18th congressional district special election. Also, as I am going to end all of these now that election season is afoot, never forget everyone, an article about you or someone you like isn't necessarily a good thing. Mpen320 (talk) 00:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Mpen320 (talk) 00:33, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Mpen320 (talk) 00:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. Mpen320 (talk) 00:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per the very comprehensive nomination. I would not oppose a redirect to next year's congressional election, such as 2026 United States House of Representatives elections in Texas. Bearian (talk) 04:17, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per extensive nomination. - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 09:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete candidates are not inherently notable for Wikipedia - I would have !voted delete on the other candidate as well. SportingFlyer T·C 17:41, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree with the nomination rationale and further find that the article subject isn’t notable simply by virtue of being a political candidate. Specifically, WP:RS coverage has not reached a WP:SUSTAINED level that would justify notability under WP:NPOL. ZachH007 (talk) 16:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. I have just come across this AfD; I will not have time to research and add additional sources by the time it closes, but I would like to put some effort into doing so, and turning the current article into a draft would facilitate that.Sumana Harihareswara 03:03, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cosm (company)

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

I stumbled upon this article after looking at the LiveLike VR article that was nominated for deletion. Three sources are given in the article, one of which is a press release, and another doesn't exist at all. Fails WP:NCORP. Madeleine (talk) 22:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 20. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:48, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Companies, Sports, California, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:08, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I'm sure this can fall under WP:PROMO as well. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 17:59, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; widespread coverage. // Gargaj (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:40, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joy Organics

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

Fails WP:NCORP, sourced to press releases and local papers that fail WP:AUD. ~ A412 ^talk! 22:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Colorado, and Texas. ~ A412 ^talk! 22:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Pdubs.94 (talk) 16:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom mostly due to WP:AUD Czarking0 (talk) 02:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All I see in the article and on Google are press-releases. Suitskvarts (talk) 13:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:GNG. In my proper WP:BEFORE, I found additional references such as in-depth coverage in Denver Business Journal ([5]) and Washington City Paper ([6]). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.150.39.21 (talk) 20:26, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of these sources meets WP:AUD. ~ A412 ^talk! 23:17, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY and passes WP:GNG - coverage has been found. 95.134.245.233 (talk) 02:13, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All cited articles are from city or state-level newspapers or magazines. Easy WP:GNG pass. 95.134.245.233 (talk) 02:14, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A more descriptive comment about how the sources meet or don't meet WP:AUD concerns would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:39, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Several articles establish notability, in particular these ones here show significant coverage on the subject: bizjournals.com, supermarketnews.com and culturemap.com. supermarketnews.com is an additional one I just found.Goodboyjj (talk) 06:00, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fredericksburg Theater Company

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

doesn't meet WP:GNG not enough sources independent of the subject nor is there significant coverage of any sort SapphicVibes (talk) 18:36, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre, Organizations, and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 18:40, 19 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!} 22:37, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I've added some sourcing, and agree that it needed such. Some are under External Links, as that seems the easiest place to put this until more info can be found. — Maile (talk) 04:25, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - appears to be a notable regional theater group. Bearian (talk) 23:37, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Warriors 4 Christ Wrestling

AfDs for this article:

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

No notable pro wrestling promotion. quick search shows 0 results. Since it was deleted in 2008, i recomend WP:SALT HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wrestling and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — Alternative weeklies are typically regarded as credible journalistic sources. Are we disregarding that source because of a dead URL? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 18:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- One source. Per WP:GNG, "multiple sources are generally expected" looking here, there are mostly wikias, reddit and facebook/youtube. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:47, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jung Lea

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BANDMEMBER. She is a member of two non-notable groups and has had a few modelling jobs, all explained with mostly unreliable references. orangesclub 🍊 10:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and South Korea. orangesclub 🍊 10:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 15:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I did the original NPP review. I considered it an edge case and for these I try to follow the community norms and marked it as reviewed and noted that it needs more sources that cover her in depth. A half year has since passed. While a stringent interpretation of GNG is not the norm, this needs sources with some degree of depth of coverage of her. IMO it would be good for anyone advocating keeping this to point those out (or add them) Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:00, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If the article isn't retained, I would prefer it be draftified rather than deleted altogether. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 20:32, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Concur with the nom: References are either passing or about things she was involved with, but not about her. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:42, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree with your comment. While I acknowledge that some of the sources may not be the strongest, the reliable ones provide more than just a passing mention of her. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 20:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mere Smith

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

Non-notable script-writer, fails WP:BIO

(Note: "Evil Gal Productions", according to the Wayback Machine, was Mere's personal blog website) ApexParagon (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, Rhode Island, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:09, 16 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!} 22:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think that she meets WP:AUTHOR / WP:CREATIVE. Doing an internet search on her name, I realised that there are WP articles about many individual episodes of Angel, and in fact 6 of the episodes she wrote have their own article. So she meets WP:CREATIVE#3: "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews ..." She was also the subject of a question in a nationally syndicated trivia quiz in 2001 [7], which is not a criterion of any notability guidelines, but surely indicates that the body of work she created was well known. I'll see what sources I can find. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:16, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:31, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Odee Company

AfDs for this article:

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

This article was written by Buzz Tatom who worked for the company and admitted to it in the AfD back in 2005. And it does not appear to be any major coverage about the company since despite being made in 1923. GamerPro64 07:07, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Texas. GamerPro64 07:07, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:49, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: AfDed before. Not eligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 09:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lxs Dos

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

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

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

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

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

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

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Philippines, Mexico, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I added a few sources to the article, which should be enough. Many sources about their sculpture in Coachella 2022. Sources from the New York Times, Cultured Magazine, Pulitzer Center, Los Angeles Daily News, Palm Springs Desert Sun, Press Entreprise. Also from books and a scholarly paper. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 07:18, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The added sources since nomination are enough to meet GNG in my opinion. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 16:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The sources added to the article are more than enough for notability. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 19:34, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bravelets

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

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

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

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

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:07, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per my comment above. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:59, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Created with templates {{NCORPcheck table}} and {{NCORPcheck}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source	Independent Content?	In-depth?
Fortenbury, Jon (19 September 2014). "Austin Company Bravelets: Helping Families In Need, One Piece Of Jewelry At A Time". Austin.com.	This is an infomercial and relies entirely on information provided by the company and/or execs	No in-depth information contained in remaining independent content
Daniels, Diane (3 March 2014). "How Does She Do It: An Interview with Stephanie Hansen, Founder of Bravelets". an everyday occasion.	This is an interview with the founder and relies entirely on information provided by the company and/or execs	No in-depth information contained in remaining independent content
N/a (2 May 2014). "Bravelets: Meaningful Jewelry Making a Big Impact". Colon Cancer Alliance Blog.	It is a blog, so fails WP:RS. Also it is an interview with the founder and relies entirely on information provided by the company and/or execs	No in-depth information contained in remaining independent content

Delete None of the sourcing meets GNG/WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability. The references are either primary sources or rely entirely on interviews with the founder. HighKing⁺⁺ 18:02, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Dallas Contemporary (via WP:PROD on 3 November 2024)
KDDM (via WP:PROD on 3 November 2024)