Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 February 25

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< February 24	February 26 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Stor-Age

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

As a for-profit company this needs to meet WP:NCORP rather than GNG, and while there are lots of passing mentions and press releases, I'm unable to find substantive intellectually independent sources. There is also a history of UPE. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:09, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ghirmay Abraham

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

Fails WP:GNG; lacks significant, independent coverage, with sources focusing on Aptech Africa rather than establishing Abraham’s personal notability. Lulakayd (talk) 17:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ikechukwu Arthur Anoke

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

Promotional, not relialbe sources, the person fails WP GNG. Redirect to Taurus Musik is not the bad option. Lulakayd (talk) 17:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

O'Tega Ogra

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

Non-notable politician or businessperson who fails WP:NPOL or WP:BIO. Sources cited and from cursory search could not satisfy requirements for WP:GNG or even WP:BASIC. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Politicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mint chocolate

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

WP:BEFORE in my assortment of chocolate books turned up nothing or mere mentions. No sigcov in Scholar, neither apparently in Books, TWL, JSTOR, Google, NYT archives. Lot of mentions of Mint chocolate chip, although it isn't an appropriate merge or redirect target. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 03:35, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Types of chocolate. Problem solved. BD2412 T 03:56, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a flavoring, like strawberry, coffee, or caramel. The scope of Types of chocolate is different, predominantly around production techniques. That being said, the scope could be redefined. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 04:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure but lean towards weak delete. The flavour is clearly ubiquitous in many cultures and geographies, so it seems hard to believe that someone hasn't written a history of the social importance of it. But I'm not seeing anything. On the other hand there are a lot of these kinds of pages, for example Mint chocolate chip, which are apparently also weakly referenced. So I'm not sure. JMWt (talk) 07:41, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also unsure, but rather than merging to types of chocolate (which is currently very much types rather than flavours, another possible target would be Mint (candy), though again it enlarges the scope of the article, which currently only deals with little white sweets/candies, not big brown bars and mint-thins etc. Elemimele (talk) 12:30, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is not an easy one to search for - so many ads come up! I have searched for both "Mint chocolate" and "Chocolate Mint", and found a variety of sources and information. Whether it will add up to WP:SIGCOV I am not yet sure. The Tokyo Weekender has an article about how "chocmint" became popular in Japan [1]. (There seems to be a graphic novel series published in Japan called Mint Chocolate, too [2]) A choc-mint drink became a political symbol in Thailand [3] (but is this article just about individual or block mint-flavoured chocolate, or chocolate-coated mint, or does it extend to chocmint as a flavour?). Mashed has an article "Here's Where The Concept Of Mint Chocolate Came From" [4]. One well-known product missing from this WP article is the Girl Scout Cookies#Varieties Thin Mints - I found histories of them here [5] and here [6] (p 110). Chocolate mints on or under the pillow at hotels is described here [7] (not reliable, but gives info that could be searchable). Mathematician Jean Dieudonné promised a chocolate mint to whoever could explain why the social background in which Carl Friedrich Gauss lived led him to 17-sided regular polygons. [8]. Half of boxed chocolate mint sales are in the last 12 weeks of the year. [9] (and that source, Industrial Chocolate Manufacture and Use, has more info about mint chocolate that I can't see. The National Druggist had a recipe for "cocoa-mint" soda drink in 1897 [10] and Henley's Twentieth Century Book of Recipes, Formulas and Processes (1909) [11] also has one. Built on Chocolate: The Story of the Hershey Chocolate Company [12] has 6 results for "mint chocolate", which I can't see all of, but can see that there's info about Hershey's mint chocolate introduced in 1959 and discontinued in 1969 (which doesn't seem to be in the Hershey article, nor this article). I'll try to find other sources. (Btw, I do appreciate the nom's reference to "my assortment of chocolate books"! ) RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:57, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! RebeccaGreen thankyou for all this! Yes, searching around food articles can really be hard to find independent sourcing. To my eyes, most of these sources are not about and do not establish notability for mint chocolate, but rather the flavor combination of chocolate and mint, which seems to be a missing broad-concept article.

Such an article would raise the question of the creation of articles for chocolate pairings of chocolate and vanilla [13], chocolate and chili [14], chocolate and caramel, chocolate and almonds [15]... Perhaps a list article would best serve the presentation of such information, although I won't pretend I know if it would meet WP:NLIST. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 00:45, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really understand the difference between "mint chocolate" and "chocolate and mint" other than perhaps the latter would include "mint chocolate chip" even though it is a flavour of ice-cream. To me, "mint chocolate chip" is a use of mint chocolate, so I don't really see why it is a separate page anyway.

As far as I can see there is at least potential for an interesting and informative page on the history of this flavour. The problem isn't with the concept but the lack of reliable sources we can use. JMWt (talk) 07:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. My name is Bearian and I'm addicted to chocolate mint. But seriously folks ... there are several good sources found already. Bearian (talk) 02:44, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep without prejudice to a merge to a new article on flavors of/added to chocolate. The sources list by RebeccaGreen above are enough to support an article, though it might be best to organize it as a section of a broader topic. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have a variety of opinions here and no consensus. Could some enterprising editor pull out the THREE best sources? I also recall during a blitz of similar AFDs 2 or 3 years ago, we had some AFD regulars and editors like User:Valereee who were well-educated in food and cookbook articles and sourcse. I just wish I could recall their usernames.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also a fan of mint chocolate, but would favour merging/redirect to Chocolate as it stands. I could maybe see an article being developed here, perhaps in the form of a broader concept article on flavouring chocolate. Until someone actually writes that, however, I don't see the depth of sourcing that really demonstrates this as an inherently notable stand-alone article. I looked at a number (perhaps ~15) of books on chocolate, including The Economics of Chocolate, Chocolate: History, Culture, and Heritage, Chocolate science and technology, Chocolate and Health, The Science of Chocolate and hardly any of them even includes the word 'mint'. That's suggestive to me that maybe we'd struggle to develop a full article here. The bits and pieces linked above, while fascinating, strike me as exactly that: bits and pieces. Hard to build an article out of. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or merge. None of these sources seems to be saying this is its own subject. There are mint chocolate everythings -- cookies, ice cream, frosting, vape -- but that doesn't make mint chocolate itself a topic people discuss. The fact there are a gazillion google hits on "mint chocolate" doesn't mean those sources are discussing the flavor. It means the flavor is popular, and people are talking about mint chocolate chip ice cream etc. Valereee (talk) 18:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers Climate Change Action Plan 2001

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

Pretty sure this is not notable enough to deserve its own article. No objection to merging if you know a suitable article to merge to Chidgk1 (talk) 15:27, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment, Canada, and United States of America. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:27, 25 February 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 ‎ nomination withdrawn. I didn't know there was a previous AFD discussion on it, which concluded as redirect, until completing this nomination and finding "2nd nomination" in the title — but there's also been a recent history of editwarring over anonymous IPs restoring the original article without improving it, so I've simply reverted the last restoration and protected the redirect instead. Bearcat (talk) 15:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trey Farley

AfDs for this article:

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

WP:BLP of a person not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria. As always, people are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they have or had jobs, and have to be shown to have WP:GNG-worthy third party coverage about them and their work in media -- but existence is the only notability claim on the table here, the only "referencing" present is a deadlinked primary source profile on the self-published website of his own directly affiliated management agency, and the article has been flagged for basic notability for a decade, and referencing problems for almost two decades, without improvement. Bearcat (talk) 15:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United Kingdom. Bearcat (talk) 15:03, 25 February 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.

Thermal Credits

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

I suspect this was something which someone thought would catch on but did not. One external link is dead and the other does not show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 15:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mason Bernard

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

Minor, short-lived guitar brand with no coverage beyond passing mentions in articles about the founder's other company, B.C. Rich. But B.C. Rich being notable doesn't make this company notable. Most of the content also appears to just be OR. Mbinebri (talk) 14:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bayu Indonesia

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:NORG – From what I've been able to find, none of the sources passed WP:SIRS since none of them contained any significant coverage of the airline itself and only contained more or less passing/trivial mentions of the airline. Examples: [16] [17] Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Travel and tourism, Aviation, Transportation, and Indonesia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naoki Hara

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

Played 5 times professionally, hasn't played professionally since, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 14:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 14:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PROGETTAPS

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

lack of notability and reliable sources. It currently does not meet Wikipedia’s general notability guideline Edit.pdf (talk) 14:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Edit.pdf (talk) 14:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Guatemala. Shellwood (talk) 14:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

COWEX A/S

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

lack of reliable sources supporting the information presented. Edit.pdf (talk) 14:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Edit.pdf (talk) 14:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ThalesNano

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

Promotional not-sourced content Edit.pdf (talk) 14:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Edit.pdf (talk) 14:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

International Russian School in Antalya

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

One cite is not enough to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 14:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, Russia, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Markus Amm

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

Not notable person Edit.pdf (talk) 14:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Edit.pdf (talk) 14:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agreed, I don’t see any significant coverage here. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 14:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 14:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Benin Golf Air

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

Per WP:GNG and WP:NORG – From what I've been able to find, none of the sources passed WP:SIRS since none of them contained any significant coverage of the airline itself and only contained more or less passing/trivial mentions of the airline. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:30, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Travel and tourism, Aviation, Transportation, and Africa. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:30, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don’t see any notable coverage here. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 14:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nahj al-Balāghah: The Word of ʿAlī

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

This book hasn't received attention from any reliable, independent sources so far, and thus isn't notable. Fram (talk) 14:18, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Islam. Fram (talk) 14:18, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fram, thanks for your help with this. I have added a citation from a prominent news website regarding the book. Let me know what else I can do to keep the page. Thanks and all the best, Josh. Earlymoderneditor (talk) 14:30, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This one? "Our project is a multi-volume work which consists of more than 10 thousand annotations and footnotes. We are pleased to announce that, God-willing, this monumental work is scheduled to be published in 2025." This isn't an independent source, it is a press release from the publishers / translators. So no, it doesn't help. Fram (talk) 15:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which book? The unpublished book that the article at hand is pushing and telling us is coming out real soon now and is the first English translation, underneath a lengthy duplicate discussion of the Nahj al-balagha (which already has a translations section)? Or the published in 2024 English translation LCCN 2023-54675 by Tahera Qutbuddin? ☺
The "prominent news website" turns out to be press releases from the organization founded by the (first) book's author, talking (10 days ago) in the future tense of "forthcoming publications" that have not happened yet, and that the world at large thus cannot possibly have independently documented outwith these autobiographical press releases.
The Sayyid Amjad H. Shah Naqavi biography of a living person is cited almost entirely to autobiographical press releases, too.
Uncle G (talk) 15:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tsutomu Fujihara

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

Played once professionally, retired in 2003, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 14:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 14:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mirrus

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

Article has no sourcing, just a link to a puff piece interview. The article was created by the same account that created the article for Brian Reid and has no other edit history. Of the 5 results when searching for Mirrus, 1 is a different company, 3 appear to be sponsored content about the product, and the last is just a mention of where someone used to work. Moritoriko (talk) 14:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising, Companies, Technology, and South Carolina. Moritoriko (talk) 14:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Coverage that I find is largely PR items. This is a brief news item [18]. Article feels PROMO, and the lack of RS isn't helping. Oaktree b (talk) 14:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IZA Journal of Development and Migration

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

Insignificant journal, publishing discontinued for years. Newklear007 (talk) 14:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals and Economics. Newklear007 (talk) 14:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. --Randykitty (talk) 16:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Koichi Ae

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

Played 4 times professionally, retired in 2006, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 14:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 14:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abdil

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

Seems to be just a different transliteration so I don’t think it is notable enough to have its own article. If there were sources it could be merged I guess Chidgk1 (talk) 13:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Islam. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of mountain passes in Turkey

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

Tagged 12 years ago as having no cites. Wikipedia:Help desk#Why do wikipedia lists need references? and the Turkish article also lacks cites. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a common problem in these List of mountain passes in... articles - List of mountain passes in Switzerland also has no refs, List of mountain passes of India isn't much better, List of mountain passes of South Africa links to a google map and List of mountain passes in Wyoming (A–J) is simply referenced to the US geological survey --Spacepine (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge table to List of mountain passes#Turkey. This is a navigational list and the respective links are implied to be references, but it does not need a standalone page. Reywas92^Talk 14:39, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:18, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had a quick look when this first came up. Although one can source mountain passes in Turkey, it is very difficult to source this specific list as it stands. It's partly a problem of names. Gülek Pass is mixed-language for Anglophones. In sources, it turns up as Gülek Bogazi (i.e. tr:Gülek Boğazı slightly mis-spelled) because they use the Turkish "boğaz" for "pass". Similarly, William Mitchell Ramsay's Maurianon and Karydion passes in the "Tauros" (not Taurus) mountains do not match anything here. Figuring out the names that will be in the geography books, and also which are the modern names, turned out to be more than a 10 minute job. Sorry Türkiye, but I already have Creeks on my plate. Uncle G (talk) 14:01, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cinemoz

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

Aside from the subject not being notable enough, the article lacks significant information and has numerous issues. Although it has been around for more than a decade, these issues have not been resolved by readers, and the article has hardly evolved at all. This indicates that it has not garnered enough interest and suggests that it likely will not improve in the future. ☆SuperNinja2☆ TALK! 13:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Karalliyada Kandegammedda

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

The nominated article and Karalliyadda Kandegammedda refer to the same locality in the Kandy District of Sri Lanka. Both were created by the same editor on 17 January 2011 at 20:18 and 20:19, respectively. The only difference between them is the spelling of "Karalliyadda", with the latter being the correct one. Therefore, the nominated article should either be deleted or redirected to the correctly spelled version. QEnigma talk 11:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Asia, and Sri Lanka. QEnigma talk 11:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cascine

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

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and New York. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 01:33, 18 February 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 11:10, 25 February 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 14:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will Wilkinson

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

BLP is sourced entirely to self-written pieces or interviews of subject (other than one "American Conservative" article which isn't WP:NPOV). Extensive talk page discussion by subject with other editors, arguing about his notability (over a 15+ year interval); WP:JOURNO non-notable journalist/blogger. Also, subject has at least two WP accounts and makes edits to this BLP as well as his wife's BLP so there's a serious COI. Re possible sockpuppet issue see User:WillWilkinson and User:Will_Wilkinson FeralOink (talk) 08:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. FeralOink (talk) 08:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:34, 18 February 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 11:09, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not seeing notability, in the article or elsewhere. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:36, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Has written a few opinion pieces, but these don't show notability. I'm not finding any articles about this person and the sourcing used in the article isn't enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:25, 25 February 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.

Diego Faria

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

Player with few professional appearances for América Teofilo Otoni and the defunct Phoenix FC. Nothing that indicates WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 11:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Sportspeople, and Brazil. Svartner (talk) 11:08, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Hasn't played enough to have enough written about him. Fails WP:GNG – RossEvans19 (talk) 13:58, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of pop perfomers

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

Random selection from what could be a nearly endless list. We have many subpages, so perhaps this can be turned into a disambiguation / navigation page, but as a stand-alone list it is impossible to compile or would simply duplicate the endless Category:Pop musicians and Category:Pop music groups trees. Fram (talk) 11:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Lists of people. Fram (talk) 11:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also the ongoing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mainstream pop performers, apparently this article was created to avoid the probabe fate of that previous attempt. Fram (talk) 11:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Presbyterian Church in Korea (BokUm)

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

No refs on the page for many years and I am unable to WP:V the basic details as they appear on the page. It's entirely possible that these can be verified in non-English sources but I'm not able to find them. JMWt (talk) 10:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and South Korea. JMWt (talk) 10:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
fwiw, it appears that there was a previous AfD as part of many bundled pages about Korean churches. That ended as NC see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Korea Jesus Presbyterian Church JMWt (talk) 10:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't find any sources covering this church to a significant degree. Cortador (talk) 10:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Presbyterianism in South Korea: The page creator had a track record of creating articles on every single obscure reformed denomination regardless of notability before his block, often using highly unreliable sources. In this case, while the page is unsourced, the subject does appear in brief mention in the standard reference work by Bauswein and Vischer. So, this denomination exists (or did at one point). But I can't find any WP:SIGCOV, in English anyway, beyond a capsule description in Bauswein and Vischer, so I think a redirect is an appropriate AtD that preserves the page history should a future editor find WP:V sources to restore the article. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:50, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zimbabwe 'A' Level Top 100 Schools 2014

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

WP:NOTSTATS, does not meet WP:NLIST. it's lio! | talk | work 10:26, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Zimbabwe. Shellwood (talk) 11:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per nom Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTSTATS (the source does not appear reliable either) jolielover♥talk 16:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aavakara

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

Disputed draftification. This cannot be moved back to draft under WP:DRAFTOBJECT without consensus, so here we are. WP:ALLPLOT, improperly referenced. Fails WP:V thus WP:N is not proven. Fails WP:NFILM. Moved to mainspace with no edits after being declined at AFC 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Rajasthan. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Fails notability guidelines. I was unable to find any additional news about this. Maxcreator (talk) 10:31, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_Rajasthani-language_films#2020_to_2025 -Mushy Yank. 10:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - and prevent recreation in mainspace. Fails WP:N.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Bayana

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

The article clearly fails WP:GNG, None of the cited sources provides WP:SIGCOV of this conflict. Koshuri ^(グ) 10:24, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, India, and Rajasthan. Koshuri ^(グ) 10:24, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Linux Software Map

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

Obscure topic without 3RR or importance Greatder (talk) 09:46, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Greatder (talk) 09:46, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~: There are a few articles written by a single group: [19], [20], plus some other coverage: [21], [22], [23]. Even though the first group of sources shares roughly the same authors, and the second group of sources doesn't contain a lot of coverage, the sources should demonstrate bare notability. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 20:59, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Helpful Raccoon Wikipedia is not a manual(Articles should not read like textbooks, with leading questions and systematic problem solutions as examples.

These belong on our sister projects, such as Wikibooks, Wikisource, and Wikiversity.) ref 1 is a passing mention, 3,4 has only one paragraph. 5 is just using the map to find licenses not treating the topic independently. Reference 2 details what LSM is and how they used it, but again wikipedia is not a manual and shouldn't have article on every single topic that is required to publish a software. It is better situated in perhaps Wikibook. Greatder (talk) 16:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first source is not just a passing mention, it contains plenty of coverage in pages 5-7. However, I'm just now seeing that ref 1 states that this group is closely connected to a major repository that uses LSM, the UNC MetaLab Linux Archives. That's enough to throw independence into doubt, so I'm withdrawing my keep vote. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 21:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 09:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Starseed launcher

AfDs for this article:

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

I didn't find any significant coverage of this idea in secondary sources, only several mentions of it. The article is sourced with one primary source and one passing mention. Without additional sources, it appears not notable enough for an article. Artem.G (talk) 14:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Astronomy and Spaceflight. Artem.G (talk) 14:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this seems similar to the proposal at interstellar travel#Nanoprobes. Perhaps this article should be merged? Praemonitus (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - I think Praemonitus has got it right. This should be sentence or two at interstellar travel#Nanoprobes, where a single proposal source would be okay. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:53, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 09:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NITron

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

Not meet GNG Xrimonciam (talk) 09:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bibliographies-related deletion discussions. Xrimonciam (talk) 09:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tourist attractions near Portland, Oregon

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

Prodded by me with "WP:NOTTRAVEL, no sources. Many of these are several hours away from Portland, so if you want to keep this, turn it into a general Oregon tourism page rather than a ridiculous "near Portland, Oregon" day trip travel guide." Prod2 from Bearian with "That's what WikiVoyage is for." Liz deprodded with "Removing PROD tag, I'll see if there are sources". Yes, obviously we could find sources that the Timberline Lodge offers skiing and is 62 miles from Portland, but perhaps I didn't need to note that since filling this with citations would not fix the fundamental problems with this page that would require a full TNT under a different name even under my suggestion to make it a better subarticle of Oregon#Tourism and entertainment or Tourism in Portland, Oregon (even as two items are in Washington). Reywas92^Talk 16:10, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 16:10, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism and Lists. Shellwood (talk) 16:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are no other Wikipedia articles about tourist attractions near (a subjective word) a city, but numerous lists of tourist attractions by populated place. So, just move and rescope the page to List of tourist attractions in Portland, Oregon as an extension of Tourism in Portland, Oregon. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:42, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are zero items here that are in Portland so a rescope would be deleting everything and starting from zero. You are welcome to create a new page listing Portland attractions should a subarticle to that be needed, but that's irrelevant to this article that can be deleted whether you do that or not. Reywas92^Talk 17:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since the article's prose links to Tourism in Portland, Oregon and includes two Portland-specific categories, I was just thinking of a way to preserve the article history. I would be fine with a rescope and rebuild; it would be very quick and easy to do. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Clearly redundant to Tourism in Portland, Oregon, and the Wikivoyage listings. Even with improvements to comply with NOTGUIDE, I don't see why this can't be folded into the Tourism article as a simple table of attractions by visitation numbers (at most). Sounder Bruce 17:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as suggested, but it's up to the closing admin to decide what to merge selectivity into Tourism in Portland, Oregon, and a redirect to that article or WikiVoyage. If Liz or anyone else finds reliable sources for this larger topic, then that would make me change my mind. Bearian (talk) 18:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTGUIDE. I don't think any "list of tourist attractions" could possibly pass an AfD here. SportingFlyer T·C 20:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just spot checked five cities from around the world in the list of tourist attractions and I don't think any of them qualify to be on Wikipedia. I think a "most visited attractions" might be okay, but they're all essentially just indiscriminate lists of things. SportingFlyer T·C 20:10, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename to List of tourist attractions in Portland, Oregon as per AnotherBeliever. Article needs a considerable amount of rework to make it appear a lot less like a travel guide. Ajf773 (talk) 08:56, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, if you rename it that, not a single word could be kept because there are zero items in the list that are in Portland. There is literally nothing of use in this article to fit that title, and there is no need to keep this page's history to support a Portland-specific list. Reywas92^Talk 14:31, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Took me a whopping 2 minutes to add 25 PDX sites to the list. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:53, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the list should be restricted to in Portland only, not outside of Portland (and especially not 100 miles away). Ajf773 (talk) 22:37, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ajf773 Done The list is specific to Portland. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:17, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A tourist attraction 459 km away??? I'm trying to imagine what this list would look like for Brussels or Paris or any city in more densely populated regions... Nothing to merge, if a list of tourist attractions in Portland is deemed a noteworthy subject and fit for enwiki then it should be started from scratch. Fram (talk) 14:42, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename to List of tourist attractions in Portland, Oregon, since User:Another Believer has improved the page so it's well-sourced and restricted to Portland. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 23:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is consensus that the page as it was before AfD was not worth keeping, but do we keep the reworked list? I'm tempted to close procedurally, as this is now a new topic, but I'm hoping that previous participants will weigh in on the reworked version.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since Tourism in Portland, Oregon#Attractions has been added during this AFD discussion as a side-effect of it anyway, it would seem that a separate article for this is hardly needed. But this now seems to be a direct analogue to, say, the Tourism in Rome and List of tourist attractions in Rome pair.
Wikipedia isn't a tour guide, so we don't say how many dollars one should expect to pay to stay in the hotels, or recommend nightlife spots to check out, or provide routes to follow. But there's a difference between than and a list of article-worthy things that (verifiably) are tourist attractions, which we now seem to have; with a sane definition of "in" to boot.
That terrible list with the things "near Portland" that were half a megametre away, and telling readers that they were "top-rated", "impressive", and "spectacular", has gone. That crosses off some of the rationales above.
Uncle G (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I thoroughly dislike "rescue attempts" where the contents of the article are completely changed, and it should be at a different title. That's not an AfD rescue, that's writing a completely different article at the wrong title for the wrong reasons. Like I said above, "Nothing to merge, if a list of tourist attractions in Portland is deemed a noteworthy subject and fit for enwiki then it should be started from scratch." Fram (talk) 08:13, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this should now just be merged into that section of the tourism article. I agree with Fram, and since it’s just a bullet-point list and the main page isn’t very long, I don’t even think it needs a standalone page. Reywas92^Talk 16:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, having a list of notable Portland attractions seems appropriate and consistent with many other cities. The list could easily be expanded with many other sites and I plan to work on this. I had previously proposed the move and rescope above, without casting an actual vote, so here's my keep for the Portland list. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As Vanamonde93 noted, the article has changed radically since this AfD was opened, and we also now have the newly created section Tourism_in_Portland,_Oregon#Attractions to consider as a merge or redirect target. Relisting for more views.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 09:32, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Tourism in Portland, Oregon. I agree with the Nom's WP:NOTTRAVEL assertion, so having more than one standalone articles on this topic is clearly overkill.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've read WP:NOTTRAVEL and do not see how the current list (which is different than the nominated version) is in violation of any rules. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:29, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Easton Rangers

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

Unable to confirm this club exists. There are a couple of results from allafrica.com between 2007 and 2009,[24] [25] as well as a BBC piece which is referenced in the article, but these give barely any details of the club itself. C 679 09:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Sierra Leone. C 679 09:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. C 679 09:27, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of football clubs in Sierra Leone – As ATD. Svartner (talk) 10:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Ad Dair shooting

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

Non-notable mass murder, WP:NOTNEWS Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, and Saudi Arabia. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment searching for sources in any right to left language is really annoying, but there is continuing coverage from years after the fact (2021 2021 2021? year is weird for this source ) from established Saudi sources, including Al Watan (Saudi Arabia), CNN, etc. My issue is that these are mostly about the guy who did it being executed. There is more but searching in Arabic is difficult for me. Still, that's not nothing. Saudi Arabia does not have very many mass shootings so this seems decidedly unusual, especially in how it targeted an educational facility. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to do a more thorough search later and then decide. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:26, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PARAKANYAA, did you get around to doing a more thorough search? -- asilvering (talk) 23:59, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did, and I'm still uncertain. The coverage didn't immediately fall off, there was coverage throughout 2016, but after that it gets hard to search especially because different sources write the name of the place and the perpetrator differently. What I am looking at indicates there is probably more I am not finding but it's hard to tell. There is a non-zero amount after that but it's difficult for me to evaluate the reliability of Arabic sourcing and a lot isn't showing up in google. This seems to be viewed as a decidedly unusual crime there, and the coverage was decently in depth from what I can find, so it's not like it would be stuck as a stub forever.

I think an OK merge would be Al Dayer (which according to the saudi sources, is where this actually happened - I think ad dair is a very small town in Al Dayer? it's somewhere in that governate for sure. 2021 saudi sources say "Education Office in Al-Dayer Governorate, east of Jazan") to a history section. Seems to be one of the more significant things to have happened there (at least enough to be reported internationally). Preferential to merge unless additional sourcing is found, but otherwise weak keep. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:15, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there are quite a lot of sources on it in Arabic meeting WP:GNG, the Arabic wiki's page on it is a good place to start. It can definitely be expanded upon. jolielover♥talk 05:02, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, The Arabic wiki's page only has coverage from the immediate days surrounding the shooting as best as I can tell, not indicative of sustained coverage, imv. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 07:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 09:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are enough Arabic sources for this article to be kept. Expansion would be good. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 09:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sufficient sourcing has been provided. Cortador (talk) 10:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Samad Ali Changezi

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

Pakistan Air Force Flight lieutenant shot down and killed in dogfight with Indian Air Force. Posthumously received Pakistan's 3rd highest gallantry award. Minimal information about him other than his death. Fails WP:GNG Mztourist (talk) 09:10, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 09:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 09:16, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. – Garuda ^Talk! 10:19, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tulasi Acharya

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

Reason why we are here is altogether 7 articles made back to back in row about this person and his books. None of the books are notable and most of them are either nepali/ english or english/ nepali translation. Author is hardly known in Nepalese context, though he has some media coverage. The context is indicating that articles are being created for promotional purpose. My speedy deleteion tag was declined and suggested to go for AFd. Here are the other articles created Swapnabhumi (Nepali novel) , mirty diary, Sex desire and Taboo, Sex, Gender and Disability in Nepal, Mochan, Running from the Dreamland Tulsi Acharya.

Rahmatula786 (talk) 09:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Nepal. Shellwood (talk) 11:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Poetry, Disability, and Sexuality and gender. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following external links added after the suggestions. Thank you for the insights and such a wonderful supportive community here:

External links

[edit source]

Acharya, Tulasi (2017). Nepal Himalaya: Women, Politics, and Administration. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 18(4), 197-208.

Available at: https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol18/iss4/14

Acharya, Tulasi (2016). Unheard melodies are Sweeter than Heard Melodies. Public Voices.

Acharya, Tulasi (2020). Disability and sex.

Acharya, Tulasi (2023). Employing Professional Standards Through Policy Reformation. Routledge.

Acharya, T., Dhungana, G. K., Traille, K., & Dhakal, H. (2023). Senior Citizens in Nepal: Policy Gaps and Recommendations. Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, 9. https://doi.org/10.1177/23337214231179902

Acharya, T., & Dhungana, G. K. (2024). Impact of technology in classrooms in the colleges of Kathmandu: Challenges and policy recommendations. International Journal of Higher Education, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v13n4p10

Acharya, T. (2024 December). Flood. MSU RoadRunner Review, Winter 2024, 7th issue. The Metropolitan State University of Denver.

Acharya, Tulasi (2022). Emerging Nepali Writers. The Kathmandu Post.

Paudyal, Mahesh (2020). When Americans Dreams Shrug off. The Gorkha Times.

^ {{cite journal}}: Empty citation (help): Check |doi= value (help); External link in |doi= (help)

^

^ {{cite journal}}: Empty citation (help): Check |doi= value (help); Cite journal requires |journal= (help); External link in |doi= (help)

^ {{cite journal}}: Empty citation (help): Check |doi= value (help); External link in |doi= (help)

^

^ Traillek (talk) 13:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: hard to find book reviews, this was all I could find: [26], but seems to be a prolific writer in journals, would they pass academic notability? Oaktree b (talk) 14:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also see a lot of book reviews of the books by Tulasi Acharya and the discussion of the author when I Google his name.

For example here. 1. https://kathmandupost.com/books/2025/02/15/secrets-of-a-suppressed-desire

2. https://kathmandupost.com/books/2023/05/27/tugging-at-your-heartstrings

3. https://kathmandupost.com/columns/2022/07/07/emerging-nepali-writers-in-english

4. https://kathmandupost.com/columns/2023/10/19/losing-faith-in-the-system

5. https://kathmandupost.com/columns/2022/04/16/the-nepali-literary-environment

6. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09500782.2023.2217804 (his book "Running from the Dreamland" has been mentioned in this article too)

7. https://risingnepaldaily.com/news/19146?fbclid=IwAR0ZfWBGkZzw2rmP8P3XW2MQf52Ilh6Q6TXzVgs03oyZBhkRsVOKV4THzSQ

8. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C11&q=Tulasi+Acharya&btnG= (Here I see a lot of peer reviewed journal articles by the author)

9. https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/news/review-mochan-more-than-emancipation

10. https://risingnepaldaily.com/news/37196

11. http://lifeandlegends.com/tulasi-acharya/

12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10272673/

13. https://risingnepaldaily.com/news/57105

14. https://theannapurnaexpress.com/story/51865/

15. https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/news/unveiling-south-asias-paradox-on-sex-desire-and-taboo-6794c0c680ccd.html

16. https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/news/accept-the-criticisms 168.20.179.63 (talk) 15:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you provide feedbacks or participate in discussion, better do it from account, otherwise editors here may suspect something else. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:10, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. You are right. Thanks for your advice. 168.20.179.63 (talk) 15:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joanna Miłosz-Piekarska

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

Fails WP:NAUTHOR. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:16, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Poetry, Poland, and Australia. UtherSRG (talk) 12:16, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article passes WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Addition; many of the refs are from what can be considered reliable outlets. The intial version would fall under WP: INHERITED due to her close ties with notable people but I neutralised to this current version.-ANU^writes 15:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I second what ANU^writes said, it follows both WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. The citations seem to be reliable, albeit they are all in Polish. However, language is not something to delete an article for. -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 12:56, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete the sources in the article are formatted as interviews and provide very little independent coverage. No reviews of her work are cited in the article and I couldn't find any in a quick google search, but I have very limited ability to read Polish. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:11, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
there is a lot more about her work on google, one I found this:

https://ksiaznicapodlaska.pl/site/epea/E11/Mi%C5%82osz-Piekarska.pdf

There are also reviews of her poetry in polish monthly literary journals, but they do not seem to appear on google SenWariata (talk) 03:44, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weal delete. The sources are poor; at best we have a few short interviews with her, nothing substantial. Her work did not win any awards and the little attention she is getting is all framed through the fact that she is a relative of a Noble Prize winner. She also has no pl wiki interwiki (and pl wiki is pretty inclusionist). I feel this falls on the WP:TOOSOON side of the borderline. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:26, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mojo Hand (talk) 13:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article passes WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. references are from respected and reliable sources. The fact that she is a close relative of a Noble Proze winner, which creates an additional interest in her writing does not take away the fact that she is recognized and highly regarded for her own work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SenWariata (talk • contribs) 02:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC) — SenWariata (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
"The fact that she is a close relative of a Noble Proze winner" is WP:NOTINHERITED. LibStar (talk) 05:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOTINHERITED, the provided sources being mainly interviews are not enough to meet WP:BIO or WP:AUTHOR. LibStar (talk) 05:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, There are interviews about her work, as well as meetings with the audience. It's unavoidable that being a niece of Nobel Prize winner she gets asks a lot of questions about her uncle and family in general. Her writing touches on the subjects of diaspora and living away from her home country, so often her readers ask about members of her family, who also were dispersed to different parts of the world due to wars and political upheavals. There are reviews of her work in literary magazines, but unfortunately these are not accessible on goggle. Found one: https://ksiaznicapodlaska.pl/site/epea/E11/Mi%C5%82osz-Piekarska.pdf SenWariata (talk) 06:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar Actually, interviews can establish notability for WP:BIO, all depending on what the sources are, how many, the style and how reliable those sources are. Can you roughly see Wikipedia:Interviews#Notability? We got the whole article there on how, which and when to use interviews to establish notability. i.e A multitude of interviews with a breadth of styles shows a wide range of attention being given to the subject and can be considered as evidence of notability. ANU^writes 10:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The interviews , as well as recorded meetings with her readers are about her work ( even if they do include mentions of Czeslaw Milosz, her uncle and other members of her family ) and are all from respected and reliable outlets. Her books are published in Poland by main stream, respected publishers. SenWariata (talk) 11:33, 19 February 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! 08:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don’t see any notability or famous works by this person. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 09:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ashish Bhandari

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

The article is covered only around his appointment as CEO of Thermax company. The sources cited in the article are press releases and announcements. Fails WP:GNG. Bakhtar40 (talk) 08:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, and India. Bakhtar40 (talk) 08:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Maharashtra and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arnold Baradi

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

The article has only 1 source, which is unreliable. RealStranger43286 (talk) 08:01, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One more is added.--Jondel (talk) 08:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are three now. Over at the Spanish wiki, it has been existing for quite some time now.--Jondel (talk) 08:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 11:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Annagudi

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

Not a single mention of 'Annagudi' [27] in the sources, let alone having a conflict around this. Another poorly cited source which doesn't have pages and relies on 2 lines of mentions in footnotes of the book [28], doesn't give confidence that this event pass WP:SIGCOV & WP:GNG. Koshuri ^(グ) 15:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, India, Europe, and United Kingdom. Koshuri ^(グ) 15:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep The proposer couldn't find "Annagudi" in the first source because the place is no longer known as Annagudi. The place is represented in the source as Kumbakonam [29]. The article indeed needs to get a fresh work, but not ready for deletion. One of the major reason for me to oppose the deletion is, it is a named battle, with much significance in the Second Anglo-Mysore War. The event is called by the name "Battle of Annagudi" by Spencer C. Tucker [30] (p-955), C. Hayavadana Rao [31] p-1317), and Narendra Krishna Sonna [32] (p-219). What makes it more notable is, it was the battle where Sir John Braithwaite, 1st Baronet got captured and imprisoned for 2 years. We get a lot of sources covering the event, eg:[33], [34], [35], [36]... Many Early British records are too available mentioning this conflict, which itself describe its importance.--Imperial ^[AFCND] 15:31, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it's named as 'Kumbakonam' I still found no mentions of the event besides in the appendix [37] which gives no insights of the 'battle'. This is inaccessible, even searching through sort method I found no more than 3 lines of coverage. C. Hayavadana Rao was a British official and his work by default falls into WP:RAJ and most of the last sources are also either old or Raj ones, which left us only two sources above which doesn't have enough significant coverage to have this topic its own article. Koshuri ^(グ) 15:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find any mentions in some of the sources, and the ones that do mention it, only do so briefly.^[1]^[2] Therefore this subject isn't notable enough for a standalone article. AlvaKedak (talk) 14:20, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:00, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meta (Thy Catafalque album)

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

Article about an album, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NALBUM. As always, albums are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show certain specific markers of notability (e.g. charting, awards, cultural impact) supported by a WP:GNG-worthy volume of reliable source coverage about them. But existence is the only notability claim being attempted here, and the article is referenced entirely to a single album review, which is fine but not in and of itself enough, and a directory entry that isn't support for notability at all. Just existing isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt an album from having to have a lot more than just one GNG-worthy source. Bearcat (talk) 18:39, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Hungary. Bearcat (talk) 18:39, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:03, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete assuming you already checked for other sources, delete per WP:GNG. (Acer's Communication Receptacle | what did I do now) | (PS: Have a good day) (acer was here) 19:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Never assume. Something. Something. Something. Something. Hungarians! --Ouro (blah blah) 06:43, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren't WP:GNG-worthy reliable sources, by and large. Louder Sound/Metal Hammer is fine, but not in and of itself enough, while the others don't count as support for notability at all. We're not just looking for any web page that technically "verifies" a fact, we're looking for a certain specific class of coverage about the album in a certain specific class of high quality media outlets which "Angry Metal Guy" and "Metal Kingdom" aren't part of. Bearcat (talk) 18:28, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hence the something; I kinda suspected they wouldn't all necessarily cut the mustard, and I should have made that more clear. But I was adamant to find something. Angry Metal Ouro (blah blah) 18:41, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 07:59, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cerego

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

This one may be close but appears to me to fail WP:NCORP. References from Venture Beat and The Next Web are churnalism based on the announcement of the company's launch back in 2012. There is this which appears to meet WP:ORGCRIT but everything else is routine announcements or brief mentions. Cannot find anything in a WP:BEFORE that meets WP:CORPDEPTH. CNMall41 (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Computing, United States of America, and California. CNMall41 (talk) 21:28, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to Business Journals piece, there's [38] from NPR and [39] from Forbes. Both seem significant and independent to me, so I think this would qualify as multiple examples of GNG. InsomniaOpossum (talk) 05:58, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:FORBESCON. I'd also think a company that is over 25 years old would have more than one WP:ORGCRIT reference from 2014 if it was in fact notable under WP:NCORP. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:16, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:57, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment I believe it passes GNG based on the source analysis and mentions. Could be on a weaker side though NatalieTT (talk) 19:47, 18 February 2025 (UTC)—WP:SOCKSTRIKE. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 15:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be curious which sources would meet WP:ORGCRIT in your opinion.--CNMall41 (talk) 06:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The WSJ, NPR, and the military publications are significantly about the company's product(s). I can't judge the reliability of the military pubs but they do provide information about product use that seems solid. That said, the article could use work if it's going to provide useful info. Lamona (talk) 04:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that WSJ satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH? Sources must meet WP:ORGCRIT and I do not see any, other than NPR, that would meet that criteria. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is what I am saying. And that I consider the military articles to be relevant and reliable. I also see other sources, such as:

"Cerego's iKnow! Wins Prestigious DEMOgod Award at DEMOfall 08." Science Letter, 30 Sept. 2008, p. 3270. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A185816485/AONE?u=sfpl_main&sid=ebsco&xid=aaa046a9. Accessed 20 Feb. 2025.
"McGraw-Hill Education and Cerego." Tech & Learning, vol. 35, no. 9, Apr. 2015, p. 48. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A419267807/AONE?u=sfpl_main&sid=ebsco&xid=04a4f19c. Accessed 20 Feb. 2025.
"Cerego." Training, vol. 56, no. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2019, p. 8. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A608614910/AONE?u=sfpl_main&sid=ebsco&xid=b3437ac8. Accessed 20 Feb. 2025.
CEREGO & BBC BITESIZE. (2019, March 1). Tech & Learning, 39(7), 39.

I looked at these and they don't seem to be re-hashes of PR (there is quite a lot of that). I haven't looked at how they might fit into the article. Lamona (talk) 02:20, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first is a routine announcement and the other are mentions so they fall short of WP:CORPDEPTH imho.--CNMall41 (talk) 18:24, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is still the WSJ, NPR and the military sources. And here's another one relating to Cerego and BBC: [40]. I count this now as 5 sources. One could argue that they are more about the product than the company, and that comes up a lot with products. Ideally the article should decide which it is emphasizing. Lamona (talk) 04:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant plural - "the others are mentions so they fall short." - BBC may meet CORPDEPTH, but the rest, including this one you just cited, is considered a routine announcement so fails WP:ORGCRIT. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 07:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Text Executive Programming Language

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP: NOTWEBHOST. We are not a website for hosting documentation, and this subject is not notable. Either of these being true is sufficient for deletion. The Knuth reference is a passing mention, and other citations appear to reference manuals for the language itself. There was a PROD more than a decade ago and the article's creator removed it. HyperAccelerated (talk) 17:53, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This seems mostly true but there is "Introduction to the TEX language - Part I" in the references section, which being in a magazine might not just be a reference guide. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:01, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That reference can be found on Google Books. The author mentions that they've served as an advisor in the development of the language. It's not an independent source, and even if it is, we generally need multiple sources to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The author was Bob Bemer, a notable computer scientist known as the Father of ASCII. He was an evangelist for TEX and often wrote programs that forced the developers to add more features to the language, so in essence, he expanded the language capabilities while not being on the team.

I can't help but feel that removing this article, which has been on Wikipedia since 2007, serves any useful purpose. It describes a language that was part of the diaspora of computer software of the era. Jedishrfu (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:30, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:00, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote the TEX article. I used the language while working at the GE Telecommunications and Information Processing Operation in Schenectady NY in the 1980s. GE was a big customer of Honeywell.

TEX was a software product offering for timesharing from Honeywell that we used to test each new OS release. it came with a large body of testing code and an application support library known as Texas. Bob Bemer was a Texan, a noted computer scientist and an evangelist for Tex.

My understanding is that both TEX and AWK were created around the same time using regular expressions and line editing ideas from Multics, Unix and GCOS operating systems. The notion of extending a line editor with programmability like TEX is quite novel.

Bob Bemer gave a talk on it at the HLSUA conference showcasing a screen editor written TEX. He als wrote about it on his blog which is long gone and a three part article for Interface Age. Bitsavers has a downloadable copy of the TEX manual. The interface age magazines can be found on the Internet Archive site.

Currently, there is no implementation running other one running on some old Honeywell 6000 timesharing service somewhere in the world. The original developers are also long gone and Bob Bemer died some years ago.

It would be a shame to lose this small piece of computer history. It was the primary reason I wrote the article. Jedishrfu (talk) 00:48, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So do you have sources that shows that this subject meets WP: GNG? I'm uninterested in hearing about anything else, and it's very disrespectful to inject paragraphs upon paragraphs upon paragraphs of your own off-topic nonsense into this discussion. Blogs, first-party manuals, and mirrors of the software do not count towards notability, and I'm not going to waste my time fishing around for some magazine for you. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:46, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, Wikipedia rules and regulations are foreign to me.

All I know is this was a real Honeywell offering deserving of a page on Wikipedia. But should you decide to remove it there's little I can do except to look elsewhere to document these arcane seldom used languages.

I imagine roughly a hundred people would likely have used it based on it being offered as an extra licensing charge. The only reason GE bought it was to get the testing code as GE did customizations to the Honeywell OS prior to use on GE machines.

i deleted the content since its considered so unnotable. I'm sorry to have bothered you with such nonsense. Jedishrfu (talk) 06:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"very disrespectful to inject paragraphs upon paragraphs upon paragraphs of your own off-topic nonsense" "not going to waste my time fishing around for some magazine" These comments are not only obviously rude but borderline personal attacks to boot @HyperAccelerated. Nobody here is forcing you to fish for anything. If you can't be civil with people acting in good faith, don't reply. DigitalIceAge (talk) 01:19, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing I wrote is intended to be interpreted as a remark about the character of any particular editor, including the person I was responding to. If you feel that it is, then I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. HyperAccelerated (talk) 04:51, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Whether you are arguing about Keeping this article or are in favor of Deleting it, we're talking about an article on an online encyclopedia, not life and death issues. If you find yourself too invested in the outcome that you start being flippant or harsh to other editors, it's time to find another activity to spend your time on, at least for the short-term. Civility is more important than whatever happens with this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 07:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Northolt Branch Observatories

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

Appears to be a hobbyist observatories or something that has a handful of telescopes. After checking with Wikiproject Astronomy, I got a response that its not notable. Having done a basic WP:BEFORE, I'm not seeing this group meeting WP:NORG. Graywalls (talk) 22:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Science, Astronomy, Europe, Germany, United Kingdom, and England. Graywalls (talk) 22:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (from the article creator): I am not going to vote because of WP:COI, but I'd like to point out that the article has been quite outdated. Uncle G has started to expand it a bit with more recent coverage (thanks!), and I hope it can get enough coverage to pass notability standards. Uncle G, I'm not sure if Lintott's book mentions the episode of The Sky at Night that featured the "discovery" of BepiColombo? It's the May 2020 episode ("Locked down but looking up"). That may be a useful addition. Renerpho (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Uncle G:, can you name the WP:THREESOURCES that you suggest as the bases for WP:SIGCOV and WP:NORG anchoring purpose? Graywalls (talk) 02:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. To repeat my comments from WT:AST: "There are dozens of amateur observatories in just the London area that send asteroid observations to the Minor Planets Center e.g. [41]. I don't see anything particularly unusual about this one. Their telescopes are small hobbyist instruments; admittedly they indicate a serious hobbyist, but no more than you would find at a typical local astronomy society. I was unable to find any substantial coverage on Google Scholar or ADS. Of the references currently cited in the article, there are two unreliable blogs, a Facebook page, and a dead link. The NBC article has merely one sentence that mentions this observatory in passing. The only source with substantial coverage is the HNA article, which appears to be a German local newspaper; I cannot assess its reliability. Even if we accept HNA in good faith, a single source isn't enough to pass WP:GNG or WP:NORG." A quick search did not lead me to additional reliable sources. I'm willing to reconsider if someone can point to substantial coverage that I've missed. Modest Genius ^talk 14:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Modest Genius: Yeah, unfortunately I ~~cannot~~ am not sure if I can add any further sigcov that goes beyond passing mentions. [42] (about 2024 YR4) mentions me with attribution, but again, that's just a mention, like many others that were published about that story in the past few weeks that quoted me. Renerpho (talk) 17:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC) Struck/edited, as I'm not so sure about this anymore. Renerpho (talk) 19:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We did a couple of TV interviews in the late 2010s and early 2020s, about what we do at NBO. I'll see if I can find recordings... Renerpho (talk) 18:22, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you are the owner and/or operator of the observatory, then you have a conflict of interest in this discussion, as well as with the article itself. I don't think we can weight the opinion of a user with a CoI. Posting 13 separate comments (more than everyone else combined) doesn't help your case either. Modest Genius ^talk 12:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Modest Genius: Yes. This discussion started with a self-report at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Renerpho. I had assumed you came here from there. Renerpho (talk) 16:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the disclosure, which seems very relevant here. I had not seen it, because it wasn't mentioned in this discussion. I was alerted to this AfD via WT:AST. Modest Genius ^talk 18:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[43] -- Interview from Feb. 5th, which got published today. It's not independent (considering it's an interview with me), but maybe it's worth adding, I don't know. Some pictures of the observatory around 2:40... some discussion of what we do, and what David Rankin has got to do with it. The interview with David (same playlist) is without my direct contribution, and he talks about me a bit, although I think he doesn't specifically name the observatory... Renerpho (talk) 20:45, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found one of them (2019),[44] discussing [45][46]. We did another longer one in 2018 from Northolt directly, but I can't find a recording right now. Renerpho (talk) 18:34, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Found one more (2018);[47] not the one I was referring to there in the previous comment, I'm not sure that one is available online. Renerpho (talk) 18:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a third one (from 2017).[48] Very brief one, and a bit improvised. It's no coincidence that all three come from the same YouTube channel. They're the only ones we talked to who seem to have their recordings available online. Renerpho (talk) 18:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:SIRS Be completely independent of the article subject. pieces in which the organization itelf is actively involved can not be considered independent. They're not forbidden from being cited, but they simply don't lend credit towards notability Graywalls (talk) 20:13, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls: I think [49] passes that bar. I wasn't even aware that that story had been covered since 2020 (and outside Lintott's book which this is apparently based on) before searching for it now. Renerpho (talk) 20:17, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This NBC News story from 2018 goes into a bit more detail about what we do, even though it's also just a couple of sentences. The situation is similar for This Livescience article from 2019. This is an interview we did with QHYCCD, the producer of the camera we used at that time; it's not exactly independent coverage though.

There are a couple of papers related to our collaboration with IAWN, including [50][51][52]; only the Apophis campaign was one that we were involved in beyond just collecting data (compare, for example, the 2021 section at [53]). The 2022 campaign got some news coverage as well, but nothing that amounts to significant coverage (example). There's also this short paper, which unfortunately came just too late for the radar folks at Goldstone to adjust their pointing... Renerpho (talk) 19:37, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are dozens of amateur observatories in just the London area that send asteroid observations to the Minor Planets Center -- While technically true, most of them are inactive, or have never observed any Near Earth asteroids. Our most active station (Z80) is at #37 in the all-time list worldwide, professional observatories included.[54] (Some of the codes on Peter Birtwhistle's map don't appear in that list because they've never observed anything.) As of 9 February 2025, 2859 of all 151553 observations in discovery MPECs (or about 2%) come from that station.[55] Renerpho (talk) 19:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the BepiColombo (2020 GL2) story, this IFLScience article from 2024 may be a good addition. At least it has more than just a few sentences (the entire article is about something we did). Renerpho (talk) 19:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This popsci.com article goes into more detail about the 2019 story covered by Livescience that I mentioned above. It may pass sigcov. Renerpho (talk) 19:55, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Outfox Magazine, a (now defunct?) Canadian magazine, ran a feature about us a couple of years ago, but I don't think that was ever available online. I could look up the details (issue number, pages etc.) if needed. Renerpho (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there were articles in some London newspapers around 2017-2019, about the observatory in general; I'm not even sure which ones. Either way, those will only have been available in print, I think (I've looked online and couldn't find anything). Renerpho (talk) 20:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If coverage is limited to blip of coverage around 2018, it may fail WP:SUSTAINED Graywalls (talk) 20:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Would be worth getting a bit more input on the nature of the sourcing
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 07:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Man in the Suit (analog horror)

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

This is an article for a fan-made YouTube series. While the videos are well-made, they are unofficial and don't meet notability guidelines since the series has little to no significant coverage. I can't find multiple reliable sources that discuss or analyze the web series with merit — I'm only finding fan discussions and fan art from Reddit, DeviantArt, Wikia's, Medium, Twitter, Instagram, etc. This article simply crosses into WP:FAN territory and seems to have been published prematurely with only two sources cited. It seems unlikely that the article can ever be improved on since the web series is not verified, by official parties or otherwise, and not covered by reliable sources. Armegon (talk) 07:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Film, Television, and Visual arts. Armegon (talk) 07:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - I kinda regret making it in the mainspace, I should have went for my sandbox, this is because I am not perfect. I only created it as a response to this revision [56] and also as a dedication to the series after it got cancelled this month, all because people were very toxic to Unknowingly when criticizing the horror stories. GojiraFan1954 (talk) 07:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Armegon Would you be open to this being sent to the user's draftspace? It might stay there forever, but as long as GojiraFan1954 is aware that it cannot be moved until the series passes GNG, there's no time limit for userspace drafts. I've got some I've had for about a decade, offhand, FWIW. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I support a draft space move. In its current form, it doesn’t seem ready for main space. Armegon (talk) 16:13, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Swapnabhumi (Nepali novel)

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

Not a notable book in Nepal. Sources are not reliable. As a book lover, I have never heard this name and its author. This is one of the Seventh articles Swapnabhumi (Nepali novel) , mirty diary, Sex desire and Taboo, Sex, Gender and Disability in Nepal, Mochan, Running from the Dreamland the editor has made in a row on different books written by Tulsi Acharya. This attempt of writing articles on such books which is hardly heard in Nepalese context raises suspicion on interest of editor Rahmatula786 (talk) 06:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of resources and independent sources added as you suggested. Thank you for the guidance. Traillek (talk) 08:40, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Education, and Nepal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Acacia Forgot

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

Very little in-depth/non-trivial coverage. Does not meet GNG. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 05:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Television, Sexuality and gender, California, New York, and North Dakota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per snowball. There's a reason almost every single RuPaul's Drag Race contestant has an entry. That's because being cast on the show essentially guarantees notability per WP:ENTERTAINER; in addition to appearing on the series, participants are cast on the independently notable RuPaul's Drag Race: Untucked, appear on the notable series Whatcha Packin' and Hey Qween!, and participate in notable events and tours such as RuPaul's DragCon LA and Werq the World. Article improvement > article deletion. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:18, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arrietty (drag queen)

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

Cannot find enough in-depth, non-trivial coverage for this person to meet GNG. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 05:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Entertainment, California, and Washington. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 05:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per snowball. There's a reason almost every single RuPaul's Drag Race contestant has an entry. That's because being cast on the show essentially guarantees notability per WP:ENTERTAINER; in addition to appearing on the series, participants are cast on the independently notable RuPaul's Drag Race: Untucked, appear on the notable series Whatcha Packin' and Hey Qween!, and participate in notable events and tours such as RuPaul's DragCon LA and Werq the World. Article improvement > article deletion. --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sutton Bonington weather station

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

Not notable according to WP:GNG, there are hundreds if not thousands of such weather stations in any each country around the world. Nyanardsan (talk) 05:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete There is no claim to notability for this station as such, and not even really a claim to the notability of the weather it records. And the latter is really the issue: the one case where Americans are aware of a weather station, it's because the one at the peak of Mount Washington records some of the worst readings in the country. There's some discussion in the article of what it takes to record the weather there, but it hardly needs an article its own. As it is, the references here are all in passing, most of them simply reporting the data collected there. Mangoe (talk) 11:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

White Supremacy Culture

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/White Supremacy Culture

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

This article appears to be promotional in nature and does not meet Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines. It lacks independent, reliable sources that demonstrate significant coverage outside of marketing materials. Bruteforce7700 (talk) 04:58, 25 February 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 February 25. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no significant coverage of this particular concept, and very weird subject matter. The study of how white supremacy can manifest in workplaces??? Followed by some traits that can lead to it like... perfectionism? Very, very niche topic, and imo loosely pulling strings together. jolielover♥talk 08:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Yes this is a weird subject, but please look at the source in the article by Ryan Grim and his blog post, "The author of a profoundly consequential document says people are getting it all wrong". I started a section on its influence and reception; this is certainly not a promotional article. Kolya Butternut (talk) 08:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)Kolya Butternut (talk) 09:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The concept of "white supremacy culture" (lowercase) is clearly notable, with multiple academic articles that have significant coverage of this topic:

I'm ambivalent about whether the article should be about Okun's paper, or about the broader concept (which is largely based on the paper). Regardless, the subject is notable: it has also received non-trivial coverage in a series of Reason articles [57] [58] [59] [60] and elsewhere [61] [62] [63] [64]. Astaire (talk) 11:09, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sex, Gender and Disability in Nepal

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

Not a notable book. Insufficient sources. Not a single neutral source. First reference is about some other Novel written by author. References 2,3 are not reputed media outlets in Nepal. Ref 4 cant be used as a supportive source. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:10, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Disability, Sexuality and gender, and Nepal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added a few more independent sources the editor suggested. Thank you for such a helpful community to guide the content/article creator like me. Traillek (talk) 08:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frøken Kirkemus

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

Unreferenced film article. Not clear that this passes WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. As a Lugnuts created stub this could have been deleted through a WP:PROD (as many of his articles have already after the Wikipedia:ARBCOM outcome), but I figured I'd give the community a shot to comment (rescue it?) by taking it here. Best.4meter4 (talk) 04:11, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 04:11, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment So far after some searching I have found this https://www.danskefilm.dk/film.php?id=162 which is sourced on the Danish version of the film's page. This link to the source material https://archive.org/details/froeken-kirkemus-1941. I expect it is based on Beauty and the Boss and its source, the Hungarian play, but I don't read Danish so searching through newspapers would not be easy for me. This website[65] says that it premiered 26 December 1941 or 1 January 1942 to help narrow down any newspaper searches. Searching with the abbreviation Frk. may be helpful as well. I will continue to look. Moritoriko (talk) 06:40, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This newspaper search [66] shows 8 hits, if someone has login access and can check if any of them are worthwhile that might help. Moritoriko (talk) 06:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Added things, including very significant coverage in Gyldendals danske filmguide. Remade the same year in Swedish, same lead actress, which has, even without considering the coverage existing both in Danish and Swedish, the film pass WP:NFIC as an important part in the career of a notable (film) personality. -Mushy Yank. 07:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How is it an important part of Viby's career? It's not the only movie she did in Sweden nor the only Danish to Swedish movie. The Gyldendals book has a lot of words but what does it say that is significant? I think that qualifies for 1 of 2 non-trivial publications more than 5 years after its release. Moritoriko (talk) 13:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Other sources indicate the role contributed to Viby's image. -Mushy Yank. 14:24, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. -Mushy Yank. 07:29, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Next German federal election

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

Violates WP:CRYSTAL, can't find any reliable sources for this specific event (most point to the recently concluded election). ToThAc (talk) 03:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Germany. ToThAc (talk) 03:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Elections in Germany. Generic perennial problem, can be redirected to appropriate dated target at later date. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 05:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. ToThAc is technically right, but we know there will be a next election and we know reliable sources will appear pretty quickly. There are (sourced) things we can say about the election now. We might as well keep the article rather than just re-creating it in a few weeks. Bondegezou (talk) 12:22, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if this article will be kept, it really should be renamed, probably "2029 German federal election". jolielover♥talk 16:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charley Pollard

AfDs for this article:

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

A companion in Doctor Who spin-off media. My BEFORE turned up nothing barring TRIVIALMENTIONS and ROUTINE coverage of the character, with no indication of SIGCOV or significant discussion, even in content farm sources like Valnet. Would support a redirect to Companion (Doctor Who) or List of Doctor Who spin-off companions. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, Radio, and United Kingdom. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I don't see WP:SIGCOV to create a substantial reception, which would prevent this from passing WP:NOT and WP:TRIVIALMENTIONs. Neutral on a redirect target. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:30, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anton Demenshchin

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

fails WP:GNG; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Russia. Joeykai (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 08:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gael Mabiala

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

fails WP:GNG; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. Joeykai (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I am unable to find any WP:SIGCOV of the subject. JTtheOG (talk) 06:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 08:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Damien Marie

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

fails WP:GNG; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. Joeykai (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shota Saito (footballer, born 1994)

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

Played 16 times professionally in 2014, hasn't played professionally since, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kévin Le Bras

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

fails WP:GNG; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. Joeykai (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 08:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Hasn't played enough to have enough written about him. Fails WP:GNG – RossEvans19 (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naoki Ogawa

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

Played 19 times professionally, has not played since 2018, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 02:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kenya Takahashi

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

There is one non press release source in the article that doesn't work. Played 24 times professionally [67], hasn't played since, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – References are primary, interviews, or profiles. Mysecretgarden (talk) 16:22, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Riku Moriyasu

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

Played 24 times professionally [68], has not played since 2019, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 02:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 08:36, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ryuya Motoda

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

Played 19 times professionally [69], has not played since 2019, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:29, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Philippe Baden Powell

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

This is the subject of coverage by non-WP:RS and WP:BLPPRIMARY sources. No combination of multiple unrelated non-primary sources appears to provide in-depth biographical WP:SIGCOV to this subject. And he fails WP:NMUSICIAN as an alternative criterion. JFHJr (㊟) 02:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, France, and Brazil. JFHJr (㊟) 02:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely don't understand anything anymore. Three Wikipedias have an article about him, and that's still not enough. I give up.--Марко Станојевић (talk) 05:36, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the sources in the article at the moment aren't the best, and the language is over-promotional, but the other articles in the other three languages use different sources (has anyone checked them? I don't feel qualified to go looking for Portuguese archived articles), and I'm finding quite a lot of shortish biographical bits for him that look at least slightly promising, e.g. at Jazz Music Archives [[70]] (admittedly user-contribution so probably not reliable source), Exclaim! [[71]], and JazzThing [[72]], these latter two looking useable. My feeling is that this might be a knee-jerk nomination without a full WP:BEFORE? A proper source search and assessment would be helpful. Elemimele (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article was less than one day old when nominated for deletion. It doesn't even have a Talk page yet! Surely it could have been tagged for needing more neutral language, more references, etc, before coming to AfD. Given that there are reviews of his albums in French, German, Portuguese and English, I think he is very likely notable. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:31, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
CommentThank you for your comments. I just wanted to mention that English is not my native language, which might be why the articles don't look perfect. Regarding what you wrote, I would like to ask something unrelated to this article. My last three articles were literally nominated for deletion just one day after publication by the same user. This wasn't the case before. Previously, if an article didn't meet the standards, it would first be moved to draft. Has something changed that I might not be aware of?--Марко Станојевић (talk) 17:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shoichiro Sakamoto

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

Played 34 times professionally (23 in Singapore [73]) has not played since 2017 RossEvans19 (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 08:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naofumi Tanaka

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

Played 48 times for Albirex Niigata Singapore [74], retired in 2018, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 02:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Gekisaka listed WP:PASSINGMENTION. JP wiki uses the same source as the EN one. Google news as 4 items, two WP:PASSINGMENTION from Gekisaka and 2 primary source. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shuhei Yamada

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

Played 5 times professionally, [75], 4 for Fujieda and 1 for Albirex Niigata Singapore, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 02:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 08:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: It's hard finding article for the guy as there is another guy named Shuhei Yamada (an economist) which ironically has more coverage than him and probably notable for Wikipedia lol. Gekisaka only listed WP:PASSINGMENTION and other than his transfer here. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:40, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tomoki Menda

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

Has not played professionally since 2017, article fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 02:09, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:09, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I mean, guy has no JP wiki article is a major red flag for a biography article. Gekisaka only listed WP:PASSINGMENTION of this guy and literally no other articles besides primary sources. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Truncated triakis tetrahedron

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

Unsourced. Although there exists some kind of this polyhedron in Google Books, it does not qualify the notability with the fact of its general explanation (construction, properties, and usage}. I thought of merging it into triakis tetrahedron, but no.

The same reason for Truncated triakis icosahedron and Truncated triakis octahedron. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 01:37, 25 February 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 February 25. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- (weak) -- 21 years is enough time to add sources. That being said, without knowing anything about this topic, this does appear to be somewhat notable... but we're also beginning to tread on WP:NOTDICT territory, in my opinion. Several other similar articles -- such as Truncated triakis octahedron -- cites no sources, either. Perhaps a list article should be considered. MWFwiki (talk) 02:19, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no sources mention it, that would be in vain. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 04:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:19, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but refocus. I think that as a convex polyhedron, the truncated triakis tetrahedron, it is not independently notable, but that as a fullerene, the one called tetrahedral fullerene, it is somewhat notable. Google Scholar finds 83 hits for tetrahedral fullerence (some in the title) and more like 1880 hits for fullerene C28 (some in the title). I have added a couple of mathematical sources that connect this shape to the fullerene (without themselves supplying notability) and a couple sources from the chemical literature that go into more depth and I think suggest notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep truncated triakis tetrahedron and refocus it on the chemistry. XOR'easter (talk) 13:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Udhcpc

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

All sources listed are either by the program's official website, or sources that aren't independent. Could not find reliable and significant sources describing this program LR.127 (talk) 02:00, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. LR.127 (talk) 02:00, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is because the actual name of the software package under which one will find it is udhcp, as documented on ISBN 9780596005023 p. 66 and ISBN 9780596555054 p. 304. Fairly obviously from those sources, it is a sub-topic of BusyBox and not substantial enough for its own standalone article. Uncle G (talk) 08:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Securian Financial Group

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

Tagged as possibly a COI article for more than four years - all sources linked are either from the company itself or aren't independent. Could not find reliable and significant sources myself LR.127 (talk) 01:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, United States of America, and Minnesota. LR.127 (talk) 01:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - 144 year-old company. A Fortune 500 company in 2023 and some other years. There are several articles that establish notability: 1, 2, 3, 4, and hundreds of hits at newspapers.com, since the company is so old.98.149.219.81 (talk) 02:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No stance on notability yet, I need some more time to go through the coverage. But the vast majority of the newspaper hits I found were advertisements from the company, and also some marriage announcements / obits of people who had worked there. I can compile some clippings of non-promo coverage later because there was some, but I would not use the number of hits as a metric here. Zzz plant (talk) 13:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Go-Katz

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources and the article doesn't link to anything that would establish notability. The article was created by a user named "Howard Raucous", with the same name as a member of the band. ~~I am also nominating the following related and unsourced page, as the label was formed by a member of the band:~~

(edit: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raucous Records for a related nomination) toweli (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, Companies, United Kingdom, and England. toweli (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Toweli: Would you be willing to split this into two separate nominations? In the end, deleting them both may be the right call...but there is more coverage of Raucous Records than there is for The Go-Katz, so it seems like they should be evaluated separately. Cielquiparle (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I'll split them. toweli (talk) 19:59, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I was all ready to !vote delete and then I found at least two big articles in Loughborough Echo via Newspapers.com (which I've now added to the article). If it were just those two, maybe it's still a delete...but there is still more coverage to go through so it's not as straightforward as I first thought. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maurice Mobetie

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

The links masquerading as sources contain only fleeting mentions of the subject and with exception of the Hamburger Abendblatt, a local gossip newspaper, are all promotional claims in this article which is little more than a potted CV. BEFORE reveals absolutely nothing else but the standard raft of Instagram and other social media. The article has the hallmarks of a commissioned work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Food and drink, Entertainment, Travel and tourism, and Switzerland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:21, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There is some coverage in swiss newspaper catalogues, but weeding out passing mentions, what's left is mostly on the WP:BLPGOSSIP level, and mostly writing about a past brief relationship with a more notable person; notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. All in all no WP:SIGCOV. Article seems to be written by a single purpose account too. YuniToumei (talk) 08:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

^ Hazlitt, William (2007). New Writings of William Hazlitt. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-920706-0.
^ Barua, Pradeep (2005-01-01). The State at War in South Asia. U of Nebraska Press. pp. 81–83. ISBN 978-0-8032-1344-9.

[1] Hazlitt, William (2007). New Writings of William Hazlitt. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-920706-0.

[2] Barua, Pradeep (2005-01-01). The State at War in South Asia. U of Nebraska Press. pp. 81–83. ISBN 978-0-8032-1344-9.

[1]