Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Virginia

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Virginia. 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:
  1. 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.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Virginia|~~~~}} 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 Virginia. 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:
Purge page cache watch


Virginia

[edit]

Ali Nasser Abulaban

[edit]
Ali Nasser Abulaban (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Microceleb who appeared in the news due to a single crime, BLP1E. V. S. Video (talk) 23:19, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep – The subject satisfies the criteria outlined in WP:GNG, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Multiple reliable outlets have provided sustained coverage, including but not limited to NBC News, CBS News, Fox 5 San Diego, and other national media such as Court TV. Furthermore, the case has inspired the documentary by G-Unit Film & Television for Peacock, signaling ongoing cultural and public interest beyond transient news.
This does not fall under WP:BLP1E because the coverage spans more than one article or news cycle, has lasted over multiple years, and continues to influence media narratives such as https://time.com/6991356/tiktok-star-murders-true-story-peacock/. WP:BLP1E is intended to address subjects whose only claim to notability stems from brief, uncontextualized mentions in the wake of a single event. The way I see it, that is not applicable here, where the subject has been the focus of entire features, that being his televised trial footage, and follow-up reporting across platforms showing the shape of social media as a whole.
Under WP:BIO1E and WP:BLPCRIME exceptions are made when the event has coverage or social significance. This is consistent with WP:CRIME, which does not prohibit articles about perpetrators of notable crimes so long as content adheres to WP:BLP, is properly sourced, and not written in a sensational tone.
The article does not violate WP:UNDUE nor WP:NOTNEWS, as the level of media attention received is both significant and ongoing. The subject has become a public figure by virtue of court proceedings, media exposure, and public commentary on the trial, thus meeting the test under WP:PUBLICFIGURE.
Furthermore when doing some digging I have seen that some articles about individuals known primarily for a criminal event could be found. Such as
For the page Murder of Laci Peterson, Scott Peterson, is moved to a subsection of the page, if it would be the case that Ali Nasser Abulaban is not notable, but his crime, then would not moving his page, WP:MERGE, WP:ATD-M or rewriting the format to reflect this be wise.
Concerns about WP:BLP are editorial, not grounds for deletion. If tone, citations, or neutrality are in question, they should be addressed via normal editing per WP:PRESERVE and WP:FIXIT, not deletion. A subject’s criminal status does not preclude article inclusion per WP:NOTCENSORED and WP:WELLKNOWN, provided policies are properly followed.
— Issac I Navarro (talk) 05:37, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Geier

[edit]
Guy Geier (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable, fails WP:GNG Polygnotus (talk) 22:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
No ~ No interview on "Featured member" area ✘ No
No No No press release ✘ No
No No No quote from Geier at the end of a promotional piece about new SAP headquarters ✘ No
No No No article about the new headquarters for the Audubon Society in NYC. No mention of Geier ✘ No
No No ~ brief promotional biography for TEDxTimesSquare ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The source assessment table is correct. Sources are either not independent or not significant. One (audubon.org) doesn't even mention the person. Might be a pretty good architect, but nothing in the article suggests this is the type of notable architect who is known for originating a significant new concept or anything else that would be in an encyclopedia. Claims like "has over four decades of experience in architecture and interior design" sound more like the top of a resume and would describe any architect in the world of a similar age. Asparagusstar (talk) 22:29, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: I won't !vote on this one, because I live in the smallest village on Earth, and we have two mutual LinkedIn connections, one who is the chair of a bar association of which I'm a member, and the other with whom I have 103 mutual connections. I will point out that everyone should carefully consider the source assessment table. Bearian (talk) 00:35, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Dillehunt

[edit]
David Dillehunt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly sourced article, which is also filled with promotional clutter and unnecessary external links. A WP:BEFORE shows that the subject is somewhat notable, but coverage from reliable sources is clearly lacking. Fails WP:BIO and WP:NDIRECTOR. CycloneYoris talk! 22:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CycloneYoris. I am the subject of this article and I disagree that notability fails Wikipedia standards in that regard. I am aware that this article was created nearly 20 years ago. It appears that the citation quality is lacking, but the projects themselves rise to the national and international level which is required in those standards. I would propose that these poor quality citations be corrected instead of article deletion. 64.96.70.108 (talk) 00:13, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For this article to be kept - you can assist by providing links to where you or your works have achieved WP:SECONDARY coverage. This may include local/regional/national press coverage or critical reviews. ResonantDistortion 08:51, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this clarification. I just overhauled the page to remove the aforementioned promotional clutter and unnecessary external links. Citations have been modified per Wiki guidelines and secondary coverage has been properly linked. Dndlive (talk) 13:55, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: - I read the NPR review and it's brutal. The Rotten Tomatoes sources are, well, rotten tomatoes. Be careful what you ask for. As I've written before, sometimes it's only the bad reviews that prove notability, while the puff pieces are just the deprecation of media in an age of corporate budget cuts. Again, are you sure that you want notoriety? I mean, really? Bearian (talk) 16:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Bearian. I like your comment, it's quite funny. That piece is a brutal but honest review and I appreciate that someone with NPR took the time to assess the film. As an artist, I take the good with the bad. Notoriety remains subjective – but I value the global reach of my projects, whether viewers like them or not. 64.96.70.108 (talk) 16:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would propose to keep this article. The subject is notable and passes WP:BIO and WP:NDIRECTOR. The article has been cleaned up and revised to address the aforementioned issues, including WP:SECONDARY sources. Dndlive (talk) 14:31, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: Just want to note that the user above has an undisclosed conflict of interest with the subject of this article. @Dndlive: what relationship do you have with the subject in question, and is he paying you to edit here? CycloneYoris talk! 20:16, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
CycloneYoris: I don't believe I have a COI with this subject. I'm a fan of his "You Can't Do That on Film" documentary, but I've voluntarily updated the page for years out of respect to the filmmaker. I'm a freelance graphic designer and I'm not receiving any compensation for these updates. I tried to create a page for his rock band as well by sourcing details from the web, but I recognize the band currently fails WP:BAND and WP:MUSICBIO. My apologies for any confusion. Dndlive (talk) 12:46, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need some more arguments focused on sources and outcomes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: The subject of this article meets notability criteria as outlined in WP:BIO and WP:NDIRECTOR and the article has been revised to include proper citation formatting and reliable sources, including WP:SECONDARY coverage. There is no COI and all citations have been validated. I suggest keeping the article and closing this AfD discussion. Dndlive (talk) 15:31, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Butterfly Vendetta

[edit]
Butterfly Vendetta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable band. Coverage from reliable sources is insufficient for establishing notability. Fails WP:NBAND. Also possible WP:COI or WP:PE. CycloneYoris talk! 21:00, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not understanding how this artist fails notability. The band meets at least two of the WP:NBAND criteria as outlined. They are the subjects of a feature documentary that has been distributed world-wide via Tubi and Amazon Prime. Additionally, their music has been featured in several independent films with global reach. Dndlive (talk) 21:37, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Further, a conflict of interest does not exist with this publication, as the artists in question are independent and representing themselves. They are not receiving payment and I am not receiving payment for proposing their inclusion on Wikipedia. Dndlive (talk) 21:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I humbly request that this article remain published due to artists meeting Wikipedia inclusion criteria, and that I be given the opportunity to revise the citations in order to avoid bare URLs and have a clear citation style. Any help is greatly appriciated. Dndlive (talk) 21:46, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The feature documentary appears to be directed by the band founder, so is a WP:Primary source. I am not seeing evidence, in the article and WP:BEFORE, of any secondary coverage showing how the subject meets WP:MUSICBIO, including coverage of the documentary itself. As it appears to be mentioned in the article - I was going to propose redirect to David Dillehunt per WP:ATD, but the sourcing for the content in that article is also poor so I just don't see how this can be anything other than Delete. Happy to modify my !vote if coverage turns up. User Dndlive - if you need any help or hints on wikipedia notability please let me know. ResonantDistortion 22:08, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ResonantDistortion: I went ahead and nominated that article for deletion as well. See: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Dillehunt. CycloneYoris talk! 22:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: I just revised the page to include WP:SECONDARY coverage that is independent of the band members themselves, and cleaned up all citations accordingly. The band was referenced in a 2015 stand-up routine by Lewis Black, they were featured in a 2018 publication by author and photographer, Rich Tarbell, and their music was featured in a 2024 dramedy by director Anna Ma. They meet WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BAND criteria for inclusion, albeit with less overall coverage. Dndlive (talk) 17:44, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I just spent a few hours of independent research trying to find evidence of notability but was unable to find qualifying RS SIGCOV to establish notability. ZachH007 01:11, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Zach - thank you for your comment. I just revised the page to include WP:SECONDARY coverage that is independent of the band members themselves, and cleaned up all citations accordingly. Dndlive (talk) 17:45, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Delete per nom. I also reviewed a few of the sources for WP:SIGCOV. Three made no mention of the band and one was about 15 seconds of coverage from an 8-minute standup set. Vegantics (talk) 20:42, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Virginia proposed deletions

[edit]

No articles proposed for deletion at this time.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Virginia&oldid=1302750282"