Shortcut WP:AFD/T
Purge

26 February 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Purge server cache

Universal Peace Foundation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Can't really find anything outside of the one RSSSF, not enough for an article Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 22:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 22:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

9202 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Declined G3. I tagged this a hoax because there isn't any information on this topic online. WP:TOOSOON obviously applies as well. The title is also ambiguous, which prevents this from being a plausible redirect. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Klein (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find enough in-depth coverage of this young cricketer to meet WP:GNG. Seems WP:TOOSOON for an article. The most coverage I found was this match report and a few non-independent sources like 1 and 2. There also seem to be a few different possible redirect targets, such as List of Netherlands ODI cricketers and List of Netherlands Twenty20 International cricketers. JTtheOG (talk) 20:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, and Netherlands. JTtheOG (talk) 20:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ravi Polishetty (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No indications that this producer or his films are notable. Sourcing does not go beyond the typical promotional trash that every film generates. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beatrice Brigden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Biography of an activist and politician, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for activists or politicians.
As always, people are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they existed, and have to show evidence of passing WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about their work -- but 42 of the 51 citations here are to a university graduate school thesis, which is not a reliable or GNG-supporting source, and nearly all of the remainder are primary sources that aren't support for notability either.
The only genuinely GNG-worthy source in the entire bunch is a short blurb on one page of a biographical dictionary, which isn't enough to secure passage of GNG all by itself, and nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable without significantly better sourcing for it than this. Bearcat (talk) 20:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 20:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Paulk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

She is only discussed in reliable sources for her role as the leader of Restored Hope Network, and a little bit less so for the fact that she had married John Paulk. Badbluebus (talk) 19:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Sexuality and gender, Christianity, and United States of America. Badbluebus (talk) 19:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of wars involving Bengal until 1971 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A WP:POVFORK & WP:POVSPLIT of List of wars involving Bangladesh, in order to evade the WP:NLIST and anachronistic issues [1]. Possibly a sock creation as well [2]. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Bangladesh, China, Myanmar, Nepal, India, Assam, Bihar, Maharashtra, Odisha, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, and United Kingdom. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: France and Netherlands. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Pakistan and United States. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir, and Karnataka. – Garuda ^Talk! 19:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was a suggestion in the talk page of the List of wars involving Bangladesh suggesting the creation for this page. I don't see how this is a POV Fork, there is no particular point of view within this page, everything is from a neutral point of view. Thorough research was put in to include every war and battle, no defeats or victories were kept hidden as to push a certain perspective. Longsword4 (talk) 19:37, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes a poor proposal by a blocked sock, which really means nothing. By POVFORK we infer: bypassing the problems of an article by creating a new one, without actually addressing the issues raised. In this case the issues are notability and anachronism. – Garuda ^Talk! 21:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whale Horse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Has been tagged for notability since 2011. -- Beland (talk) 18:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 18:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LIFX (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A product that came out, got a blip of coverage, then got acquired. Fails WP:20YT and WP:NPRODUCT, because notability should have significant independent coverage and be enduring. Graywalls (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, Technology, and Australia. Graywalls (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Baker (entertainer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This guy looks almost notable, but doesn't appear to cut it really.

• [3][4] These sources present some original, third party commentary about him.
• [5] This doesn't.
• [6][7] These look like press releases or advertisements. Badbluebus (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Entertainment, United States of America, Oklahoma, and Washington. Badbluebus (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Based on the list of tv shows provided on the article + on his website, i would argue he meets WP:ENT, but definitely requires more sources. Braedencapaul (talk) 20:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lucas Caniggia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Only shows his time in the Corinthians youth sectors in 2014, and 10 matches for Flamutari at Soccerway ([8]). Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 17:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Sportspeople, Brazil, and Albania. Svartner (talk) 17:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Gomes (footballer, born 1993) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

He was part of the Copa São Paulo winning squad for Corinthians (U20 tournament) but had no relevance in the rest of his career. I haven't found anything that demonstrates WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 17:35, 26 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) 17:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Santhi Sathyan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Moved from draft without being reviewed, clearly fails WP:GNG, setting a Guinness world record is not enough to pass the criteria. Theroadislong (talk) 17:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge that the article may not currently meet notability guidelines. I request that this article be moved back to the **Draft** space instead of being deleted so that I can work on improving it with better sources. Digiflock (talk) 18:20, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It had previously been returned to draft so that is not an option. Theroadislong (talk) 20:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Given the move history of this article, which originated as the userpage for creator Digiflock (talk · contribs), someone might want to do something about the fact that Talk:Santhi Sathyan contains the type of messages that actually should be on User talk:Digiflock (a user talk page that should not have been moved)… (No opinion or comment on the article itself.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

João Arthur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The player participated in 7 matches for SE Palmeiras in 2010 [9], but in 2013 he was already retired with very few professional appearances. There is nothing to indicate enough WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 17:09, 26 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) 17:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Hasn't played enough to have enough written about him. Fails WP:GNG – RossEvans19 (talk) 18:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pedro Vitor (footballer, born February 1998) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Athlete with few professional appearances (8 matches for Tupi FC and 2 for Costa Rica-MS [10]). The article contains a call-up by an infamous Brazil university team (I've never heard of it). Gross failure in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 17:00, 26 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) 17:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Creating this in the first place was a major error, but no harm done. Geschichte (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Barrie Jones (Canadian Photographer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:BLP of a photographer, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for artists.
As always, artists are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on third-party coverage about them in media -- for instance, you don't make an artist notable for gallery shows by sourcing them to the self-published websites of the galleries, you make an artist notable for gallery shows by sourcing them to media reportage (art reviews, etc.) treating the gallery shows as news. But this is referenced almost entirely to primary sources (the galleries, academic staff profiles, etc.) that aren't support for notability, except for one magazine article that briefly namechecks Barrie Jones as one participant in a group show, which is a valid start but not strongly enough about him to singlehandedly get him over GNG all by itself if it's the only non-primary source in the mix.
Also this started life in draft form before being moved into mainspace by its creator without any form of AFC review, and has already been stripped of copyrighted content that was copy-pasted directly from one of his staff profiles. As well, the title is unnecessarily overdisambiguated — since none of the other people listed in the disambiguation page at Barrie Jones are photographers, just "photographer" would suffice and "Canadian photographer" is overdoing it — further suggesting that the creator lacks functional understanding of Wikipedia's rules and practices.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt Barrie Jones from having to have proper WP:GNG-worthy coverage about him and his work in real media. Bearcat (talk) 16:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 16:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Photography. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gilsinho (footballer, born 1991) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

After a WP:BEFORE I only found his passage through three defunct teams: Palmeiras B, SC Atibaia and J. Malucelli [11]. No signals of WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:39, 26 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) 16:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reza Fekri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Does not appear to meet WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:GNG Hey man im josh (talk) 16:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Iran. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aero Fiesta Mexicana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

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) 16:13, 26 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 Mexico. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:13, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -more of a procedural vote because Im the article creator. But Im working at finding more sources. Jeanette, babe, join me at my fiesta Martin (aqui?) 20:30, 26 February, 2025 (UTC)

Beverley Rose A. Dimacuha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I was tempted to delete this G10 but there is a source, just not one I seem to have access to. I have removed a sentence that would need very good sourcing and rewriting for neutrality. But probably best to delete unless we can get some people who have sources in that country and can write neutrallly ϢereSpielChequers 15:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The use of asterisks in this article is very strange. AI generated perhaps? One of the claims in the article was sourced with an Instagram post too, I just removed it. MediaKyle (talk) 16:13, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 17:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Viraj Bahl (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The article does not meet WP:GNG as the sources mainly focus on the subject interviews and statements, without providing significant coverage. Majority of cited sources focus on Viraj Bahl company growth (revenue & product launches) rather than his personal notability as an individual. Refs (India.com, TimesNowNews, DNA India) lack depth or are promotional in tone. Coverage in outlets ( Inc42 and ET Retail ) primarily discuss Veeba as a company, not Viraj Bahl individual legacy or influence beyond his role as founder. While his role as a judge on Shark Tank India(2024) adds to his public profile, this is recent and may not yet be supported by independent sourcing to confirm lasting notability failing WP:NBLP and many of the sources here are exactly what WP:NEWSORGINDIA tells us to watchout for. NXcrypto Message 04:14, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Business, Companies, Singapore, and India. NXcrypto Message 04:14, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Made substantial improvements to the page and added multiple reliable sources that provide significant coverage and meet WP:NBASIC. There is also extensive media coverage in various local languages. Ariz Shaikh (talk) 07:49, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Can you also cite the sources that would confirm your !vote? CharlesWain (talk) 08:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete fails WP:GNG. If anyone is interested in creating an article about him then they should first try creating something about his company. It's his company that has got more coverage. CharlesWain (talk) 08:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @CharlesWain Indeed, and the cited references focus more on his company than on him. NXcrypto Message 16:35, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Passes WP:GNG and NBASIC with significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV) in The Economic Times, Financial Times, India Times, and Navbharat Times, as well as an in-depth article in Business Outreach. While the article has a promotional tone, this can be improved with regular editing. Baqi:) (talk) 10:22, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Where is the WP:SIGCOV? The article from Business Outreach is clearly a paid one. It cannot be considered as a reliable source. NXcrypto Message 16:27, 9 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!} 06:26, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The above comments made in support to keep the article are unconvincing. Subject fails GNG. Agletarang (talk) 08:41, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails GNG. AgerJoy talk 08:53, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep new articles[12][13] are appearing related to his TV work. Orange sticker (talk) 12:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Both of these sources only have generic bylines and do not identify an individual reporter and therefore unusable for establishing notability per WP:NEWSORGINDIA. - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:37, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: This article meets WP:GNG. There is WP:SIGCOV in multiple reliable sources that focus on his personal notability. It also meets the basic criteria of WP:NBLP since the subject is notable for more than one event (again, as evidenced by the reliable sources cited).--DesiMoore (talk) 15:55, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: as Per Orange Sticker and DesiMoore, the article contains several significant coverage sources about the subject from reliable sources and plenty more online about him and his TV work. (Ref 1) The Forbes article also contains significant coverage; his name appears 28 times in the article Monhiroe (talk) 09:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Per above, the subject meets WP:GNG and WP:NBLP. Taabii (talk) 12:30, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Despite all the WP:VAGUEWAVES votes above (which should be discarded by the closer), no evidence has been provided for meeting the notability guideline, the sources cited in the article all have issues such as lacking bylines , promotional tone etc. as noted at WP:NEWSORGINDIA. They are unusable for establishing notability. - Ratnahastin (talk) 12:35, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails WP:GNG, citations are not independent of the person and not enough significant coverage independent of the subject. Common knowledge that Sharktank judging slots nowadays are up for sale. JustinTrooDooo (talk) 16:26, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Are you suggesting that all judges who appear on the show pay for their spots? That's your personal opinion and it's a separate discussion that would require solid evidence to back it up. Shark Tank is a popular global business show and any such claim would need to be backed by solid evidence. EmilyR34 (talk) 05:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Sources cited in the article like Forbes, GQ and several others are bylined, independent, and provide sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG. Bakhtar40 (talk) 10:21, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, this satisfies WP:GNG and hence it should be there on Wikipedia.Adamantine123 (talk) 14:57, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep– I respectfully disagree with Ratnahastin. The points made by the editors above especially DesiMooreo and Monhiroe regarding WP:GNG and WP:NBIO are valid and can not be overlooked. Having generic bylines does not necessarily mean an article is unreliable or paid for. The sources highlighted by Orange Sticker are neutral with no promotional tone and are totally usable here. I also don't agree with the claim that all the sources in the article are unbylined or promotional. In fact, the majority of the article's sources (about 17) are clearly bylined and come from reputable news outlets. For instance, sources like Forbes India, GQ India, Outlook Business, and Indiatimes are reliable independent and well-established with editorial oversight and significant coverage. These sources aren't promotional and are quite usable in establishing this person's notability. Indian Express, Times Now, and Economic Times are also good sources. Additionally, being a judge on Shark Tank, one of the most popular global business television shows, is significant. This individual has received significant media attention for his appearance on the show and continues to get more coverage from independent media as shown by online searches.EmilyR34 (talk) 04:53, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You clearly have ignored all concerns about WP:NEWSORGINDIA, the articles you have cited [14][15][16] (two of them with generic bylines)are nothing more than puff pieces and should be discounted per the guidance. - Ratnahastin (talk) 03:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm fully aware of WP:NEWSORGINDIA and everything I wrote above. Almost all media outlets, big or small, publish paid or sponsored content not just in India but worldwide. At the end of the day, media companies aren't nonprofits. Their main job is reporting, writing, editing, and presenting news to the public, but they mostly survive on advertising. You see a lot of display ads on their websites and advertisements in newspapers that's how they make money. That said major media outlets categorize paid stories separately. For example, The Times of India publishes them under "Spotlight," Hindustan Times under "Brand Media" or "Impact Feature," and Inc42 under "BrandLabs." These articles are usually puffery and easy to spot (not lecturing). You're right that they don't establish notability but that doesn't mean we should classify everything that isn't published under those specific categories in WP:NEWSORGINDIA just because they have generic bylines and only consider editorial content. Plenty of Wikipedia articles use sources without bylines. Major publications have strict editorial processes. Proper bylined articles go through rigorous review and fact-checking. I don't think all articles fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Sources includingForbes India, GQ India, and Outlook Business, provide reliable, independent coverage with editorial oversight and are valid sources. As for the other articles, I wouldn't call them puffery. Puffery is exaggerated or misleading praise. EmilyR34 (talk) 05:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  "publish paid or sponsored content" Yes with adequate disclosure, but that doesn't happen in India, you entirely missed the point of the guidance. Indian media is notorious for publishing paid news/coverage without any disclosure, they publish press releases, churnalist puff and promotional pieces as news, read User:Ms Sarah Welch/sandbox/Paid news and private treaties too. "I wouldn't call them puffery" - Did you even read them? They all have promotional tone. - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Let's not get into this sandbox as Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is the right place to discuss this- I understood what you're trying to prove with your comments, so let's focus on that.

  "But that doesn’t happen in India," as you claim, then why did these publications introduce paid content categories and choose not to publish such content under "Staff Reporter" or an editor's name? How did we find out that publications label content as "Brand Media," "Brand Post," "Featured Content," "Partnered Content," "Spotlight," or "Brand Lab" to indicate paid material? And how were they reported and included in WP:NEWSORGINDIA? Isn't that a disclosure?

  Just because some publications or journalists engage in this practice (posting paid content without proper disclosure) does not mean we should assume the same for every outlet. I'm not claiming media companies are NGOs (please refer to my previous comment carefully). However, making broad generalizations about all publications is neither accurate nor fair.

  Notability should be evaluated solely based on the sources used- if independent sources provide sufficient coverage, the subject meets our notability criteria. If not, the content should be removed. The sources I presented above offer sufficient, independent, reliable, and significant coverage and meet WP:GNG. I will end it here. EmilyR34 (talk) 07:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  AfD is the proper place to judge sources which what we are doing here. "paid content categories and choose not to publish such content" - You are failing to understand that guidance is clearly about undisclosed paid editing in Indian media, these media houses publish press releases and puff pieces intermingled with regular news. - Ratnahastin (talk) 08:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, AfD is the right place to evaluate sources and that's what I pointed out in my comment above. However, it seems like instead of doing that we're lumping everything under WP:RSNOI. EmilyR34 (talk) 08:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep As per all above. Meets WP:GNG and WP:NBLP. Godovereverthing (talk) 07:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  See WP:NEWSORGINDIA. NXcrypto Message 03:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Forbes India, GQ India, Outlook Business, and Indiatimes also fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA? EmilyR34 (talk) 07:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  All of them are indian sources , therefore if they have issues that are documented at the guidance, they fall under it. - Ratnahastin (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  No, that's not what I asked. I'm questioning whether Forbes India, GQ, Outlook Business, and Indiatimes, which I provided above, also have the same issues mentioned at WP:NEWSORGINDIA. EmilyR34 (talk) 08:20, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source assessment done by someone familiar with our notability guidelines would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 09:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep- meeting WP:GNG and WP:NBIO with significant coverage independent of the subject in Forbes India, GQ India, Outlook Business, and IndiaTimes found by EmiliyR34 and per DesiMoore's rationale.Frank Ken (talk) 12:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Seems notable and satisfies GNG, as there is sufficient significant and reliable coverage about the individual in sources that are independent and reliable.Chanel Dsouza (talk) 08:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The subject does not meet the notability criteria as the available sources fail to provide significant, independent coverage as required by WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Most articles are passing mentions, churnalism, and a mix of interviews and pre-written basic information, which do not establish notability. Many Keep voters have not thoroughly analyzed the sources, and a proper source assessment table is needed. Based on my analysis, only Forbes India gives something close to significant coverage. 2003:C8:A746:9200:1DF5:3EBC:FC95:D4A4 (talk) 14:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC) — 2003:C8:A746:9200:1DF5:3EBC:FC95:D4A4 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  Have you thoroughly analyzed all the sources before posting your comment here? This appears to be a desperate attempt to delete a notable article. Could you please explain how WP:GNG or WP:NBIO is not met and how sources like Forbes India, GQ India, Outlook Business, and Indiatimes are passing mentions. EmilyR34 (talk) 14:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus is reached so far. Might need this relisting & source analysis.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 15:15, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Can any of the keep voters mention the three to five best sources? A complete source analysis would take a lot of time. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 16:11, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas Dunlop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this biography of a climate activist, and added sources. I am not seeing significant coverage, however; most references are quotes from him about the various organisations with which he is involved. I do not think he is notable on the grounds of WP:GNG or of WP:ANYBIO. Note a recent addition of unsourced content here, which I reverted; without sources, which I have not found, I don't think there is much here contributing to notability. Redirect to World Future Council might work, although at the moment he is not mentioned in that article. Tacyarg (talk) 14:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment, Ireland, England, and New Zealand. Tacyarg (talk) 14:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Konosuke Kusazumi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

He played 7 J3 league games in 2017, has not played professionally since. No article on the Japanese wikipedia. Creator is blocked. RossEvans19 (talk) 14:54, 26 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) 14:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, has never been relevant. Geschichte (talk) 21:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Augusto De Luca (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Dubious notability, tagged as such since 2023 without improvement. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:59, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Photography, and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 22:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, as mentioned in the previous deletion nomination, the article was initially created as a “promotional entry” and that may have been the case, however, I created this article independently, without knowing a previous version existed, and without any contact with those who worked on that said original. As stated in the previous deletion discussion, the subject had notability, but the article was removed due to its promotional nature, something that isn’t the case now. V.B.Speranza (talk) 22:25, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In the previous deletion discussion, notability was never stated, established, or discussed.--WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me, but the nominator clearly said that there was notability but that was useless due to it being a promotional entry 👍.

Cheers,

V.B.Speranza (talk) 23:59, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*I respectfully disagree with you. The first nomination states The photographer (maybe) can have its own importance but this article was created together with other articles on other Wikis and other projects such as Wikiquote as part of a global promotional campaign on Wikipedia. The nominator clearly states maybe. The deletion was based on WP:PROMO. Notability was never addressed. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, I believe that Wikipedia is mainly interested in the encyclopedic nature of the character. So... just look on Google at the dozens of articles that this photographer has had, the people he has met and photographed in his career, the exhibitions and books he has created to understand that De Luca has all the qualifications and requirements to stay. RonnyW55 (talk) 07:24, 14 February 2025 (UTC) — RonnyW55 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  @RonnyW55 I agree, even if the previous page had the wrong intentions, I created this without knowing about it and I’ve done my best to keep it neutral and correct. V.B.Speranza (talk) 16:37, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @V.B.SperanzaI am certain that the current page does not contain any celebratory or promotional element. RonnyW55 (talk) 09:15, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To remind you, we are discussing the notability of the article's subject per WP:NBIO, not the intentions of the article's author or the neutrality of its content.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, In addition to the many links that I have inserted in the discussion page of this photographer, some very important events with related correspondence are mentioned, such as: the exhibition at the Chamber of Deputies with the presentation of the President of the Italian Republic Giorgio Napolitano and the interventions of the Honorable Nilde Iotti and of Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, also President of the Italian Republic before Giorgio Napolitano * "La mostra alla Camera dei Deputati di Augusto De Luca" (in Italian).Scatole Piene. Then De Luca received, together with the maestro Ennio Morricone (Oscar for career as a composer), the "Città di Roma Award" for his photographic book "Roma Nostra". Morricone received the prize for a poem he wrote in the same book * "Ennio Morricone e Augusto De Luca Premiati" (in Italian).EDUcational Encyclopedia of Digital Arts. Is this notable or not ? RonnyW55 (talk) 13:55, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - note to closer SPA RonnyW55 has !voted twice. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:00, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article has just been published * "Interview with Augusto De Luca". - The Unique Magazine. In which Augusto De Luca talks about his meeting with Carla Fracci. Carla Fracci (quote from en.wikipedia): “was an Italian prima ballerina, actress and ballet director. Considered one of the greatest ballerinas of the 20th century”. RonnyW55 (talk) 12:10, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I am not finding any reliable sources for the biographical information presented in the article. Unsourced list of books and promotional "link farm" tacked on the end. This artist does not meet WP:NARTIST. He has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. Seems more like WP:PROMO. See source assessment table below. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:22, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://divisare.com/authors/2144741162-augusto-de-luca			Looks like user submitted work on the site	✘ No
https://www.degruyter.com/database/AKL/entry/_10184694/html			listing for birth date and place only.	✘ No
https://www.dailybest.it/art/la-strana-storia-di-augusto-de-luca-il-cacciatore-di-graffiti/	Dailybest is an online magazine dedicated to the best of digital culture and Italian and international creativity.		Looks like churnalism site. the translated "about" page tells how to submit articles.	? Unknown
http://ndmagazine.net/photographer/augusto-deluca/			dead link	✘ No
https://www.buongiornosuedtirol.it/2025/02/01/augusto-de-luca-il-maestro-della-fotografia-conosciuto-in-tutto-il-mondo/			Looks like churnalism site.	? Unknown
https://befrontmag.com/2018/04/03/augusto-de-luca-spaces-sculptures/			first person /interview	✘ No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT-iK3roJXI			YouTube promotion of book and exhibtion"NAPOLI DONNA"	✘ No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWvRxXYTzfA			YouTube promotion of book"FIRENZE FRAGMENTI D'ANIMA",	✘ No
https://www.edueda.net/index.php?title=Ennio_Morricone_e_Augusto_De_Luca_-_Premiati			user generated content	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Comment - I apologize but I didn't know that if there is a new vote, however, there cannot be a new vote of the individual with new testimonies. But, having clarified this... is at least a discussion possible?

I believe (citing the exhibition above at the Chamber of Deputies) that probably two Presidents of the Italian Republic would not have gone to present the exhibition of an unknown photographer. To the many other exhibitions mentioned on the photographer's discussion page, there is also a video and an article of this other exhibition by Augusto De Luca at the Museum of Rome - Palazzo Braschi.

• - VIDEO - exhibition at the Museum of Rome
• - Mostra al Museo di Roma del fotografo Augusto De Luca

The critical texts are there: this is an important critical text in Italian and English from the FOTOTECA Siracusana*- Siracusana Photo Library In all De Luca's books, as you can verify, there are interventions by very important people who certainly would not have participated if the author had not been a renowned photographer:

• - Gangemi PUBLISHER

Ferruccio Amendola, Maurizio Costanzo, Carlo Delle Piane, Virna Lisi, Luigi Magni, Nino Manfredi, Ennio Morricone, Nicola Pietrangeli, Paolo Portoghesi, Alberto Sordi, Valentino, Monica Vitti, Lina Wertmuller, Gino Bartali, Alessandro Benvenuti, Chiara Boni, Athina Cenci, Jury Chechi, Sandro Chia, Margherita Hack, Fiona May, Sergio Staino, Mario Luzi, Giorgio Albertazzi, Giuseppe Abbagnale, Peppe Barra, Renato Carosone, Luciano De Crescenzo, Luigi De Filippo, Ida Di Benedetto, Roberto Murolo, Nino Longobardi, Michele Prisco, Lina Sastri, Mimmo Liguoro. In the end…in many articles like the one I published above on the portrait of the dancer Carla Fracci, the various public and private collections in which De Luca's works are found are mentioned, just go and see. To name a few: Musee de la photography - Charleroi, Belgium International Polaroid Collection - Cambridge, États-Unis Musée de l'Élysée - Lausanne, Suisse Municipal Photographic Archive - Rome, Italy Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris Galerie nationale des arts esthétiques de la Chine, Pékin RonnyW55 (talk) 07:45, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• RonnyW55, Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Thanks. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 16:09, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• WomenArtistUpdates, Ok,Thanks. --RonnyW55 (talk) 20:36, 24 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) 14:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep: A non-trivial amount of coverage found in Gnews, mostly Italian sources [17], I spot checked some. This is an interview [18] but he seems to have been active for a while and has taken photos of rather notable individuals. Oaktree b (talk) 14:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also has a listing in the Getty ULAN, [19], with biographical info in Dutch, implying an amount of critical notice outside his home country as well. The Italian wiki says he has photos in the collection of a gallery in Firenze (Florence?), which should satisfy one of the artistic notability criteria. Oaktree b (talk) 14:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maryam Rostampour and Marziyeh Amirizadeh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Please see the message on my talk page requesting deletion. Previous rationale for no consensus was that the subject(s) of this article wished the page to be split and not deleted; I think that the current comment on my talk page makes it clear that deletion is an option per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. GnocchiFan (talk) 08:27, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Christianity, Iran, and Georgia (U.S. state). Shellwood (talk) 10:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE, the requirements for us to keep this article seem to be either proving greater-than-marginal notability or forming a clear consensus against deletion. While I can see the case for marginality regarding Rostampour, Amirizadeh's later activities suggest more significant and sustained notability. Not !voting right now, as the policy here is a tad contradictory with other policies (that's not a bad thing, as this allows us to address competing interests). ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:02, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment and a complex !vote. Like Pbritti I am a bit conflicted on the best outcome. In the last AfD I supported a merge to Evin Prison since I don't believe either is individually notable. (I guess I should have followed Owen's instructions to do a bold merge but I confess I didn't have it on my watchlist so didn't notice the close.) I think the best case would be to delete this page per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE, since the case for the notability of these individuals as a pair is marginal, and redirect Marziyeh Amirizadeh, which currently redirects here, to Evin Prison to preserve the possibility of expansion of an article on the apparently more notable of the two. Since there is currently no redirect at Maryam Rostampour, this addresses the BLPREQUESTDELETE issue. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  PS I have added the AfD header template to the article page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  An alternative option, to preserve the page history, would be for any page mover to move this page to Marziyeh Amirizadeh without leaving a redirect, then redirect that title to Evin Prison. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:24, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Dear Voters, Thank you for considering our concerns regarding the shared Wikipedia page. At this time, I (Maryam) do not wish to have a separate Wikipedia page. I am open to either deleting the page or removing my name so that Ms. Amirizadeh, who appears to be more notable and eligible for a Wikipedia page, can use the article as her personal page. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions. We greatly appreciate all your efforts in assisting us. MrostampourKeller (talk) 14:34, 21 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) 14:11, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Emil Kalous (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NATH and WP:NOLY. Non-notable athlete with a short career and without achievements.The recent expansion did nothing to prove notability. FromCzech (talk) 08:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 08:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: As I had stated in my prod endorsement: Fails WP:NATH and WP:NOLY. Also fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – The third reference looks decent, but multiple sources containing significant coverage are required. It also looks like a blogspot anyway. I thought of redirect to Athletics at the 1924 Summer Olympics – Men's marathon#Results, but given that nothing happened to this person since his participation and we can't find anything to verify his death, further coverage of him are extremely impossible to find. Offline sources like archived newspapers may exist, but we can't assume that to be the case. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Clariniie, although multiple sources containing significant coverage are required to exist, only one is actually required to be cited in the article, per WP:SPORTCRIT prong 5 which is fulfilled in this case. I don't think that It also looks like a blogspot is a fair reason for dismissing a source because it's not a Blogspot site. --Habst (talk) 13:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Even with only one significant coverage seems to be weak to establish notability. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Meeting this requirement alone does not indicate notability, but it does indicate that there are likely sufficient sources to merit a stand-alone article. That indication is if the subject already meets NATH, which they don't. We need to establish GNG for him here. JoelleJay (talk) 22:16, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – Per above. Svartner (talk) 12:46, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Another Lugnuts page. Per Clara. RossEvans19 (talk 13:27, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per the expansion. Subject was a runner-up finisher at the Prague Marathon (before its 1995 reboot) in the 1920s, posted top times in the 5000 m and 10,000 m and was also an accomplished association football player. One of the sources we have says (translated), "sometimes you'll find his name in an old almanac or brochure mentioning the old days of Hradec Králové athletics". So that means invoking WP:NEXISTS is valid here -- where are those old almanacs or brochures? As long as we know they exist (and we do because they're referenced in the article), Wikipedia guidelines say those should be considered in deletion discussions. --Habst (talk) 14:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Nothing in the expansion suggests it would pass the WP:NATH criteria. The 1920 marathon in Prague is a different competition than the modern Prague Marathon, and with significance not exceeding the national level. Records in almanacs about regional athletic competitions can hardly be taken as SIGCOV and notable sporting achievements. It is also not true that he was an "accomplished association football player" – there is only a mention of him playing for a club playing in a regional competition. FromCzech (talk) 11:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Have any Czech newspapers from the time been searched? BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:47, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect. No SIGCOV in IRS. The Hradec Kralove site is a group blog by local amateur sports historians. If actual sources are found the page can be recreated. JoelleJay (talk) 19:22, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Habst. Notable through competing in the Olympics as well. Paul Vaurie (talk) 20:29, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Habit and COMMONSENSE. GiantSnowman 20:07, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the expansion by Habit. We haven't even checked old Czech newspapers yet. The Knowledge Pirate (talk) 22:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Czechoslovakia at the 1924 Summer Olympics#Athletics, as the subject is listed as a competitor at this target. Fails GNG and NATH due to a lack of SIGCOV. I don’t believe the recent additions do much to move past the GNG threshold. Frank Anchor 16:02, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would be fine if this ended as redirect. Article can be restored if anyone has found archived newspapers containing significant coverage, as BeanieFan11 said. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:14, 23 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) 14:11, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dogfish Pictures (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

lacks significant coverage in independent, reliable sources to establish notability per Wikipedia’s guidelines for companies and organizations Loewstisch (talk) 14:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Loewstisch (talk) 14:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Finance, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Supermobile (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Very minor element of the Superman universe; short article, pure plot summary and list of appearances. Fails WP:GNG. No idea where this could redirect, but always open to consider redirection a viable alternative to hard deletion (closer, please note: if anyone suggests a target, consider me to support it). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:01, 12 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, and Comics and animation. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant delete unless a merge target can be found. There's not really a good merge target for this. Perhaps to Superman#Merchandising given the one source mentioned here mentions it was used exclusively for that purpose? But even so it'd be a brief sentence. This is an extremely minor universe element, so there's not much to be retained here. If a good merge target is found I'll change my vote to merge, so ping me if something changes. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:56, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or merge with Superman in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. We need an equipment or technology section to that page if the Supermobile going to be redirected there as we already know that Batman has a similar section on his page. --Rtkat3 (talk) 02:07, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't really feel another section is necessary unless Superman has a ton of technology that has discussion. Batman is discussed for a lot of his tech, and much of his tech has coverage. Superman has comparatively less. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The only other technology I recall him having is the Phantom Zone Projector, but it didn't have an article and was covered in the Phantom Zone page. --Rtkat3 (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As an alternative, a section could be added to Fortress of Solitude for things located/stored there. There are more items than one might think.

  That said, I think the best solution might be to Listify Category:DC Comics vehicles (and Category:Marvel Comics vehicles). If you look at AfD right now, several vehicles are up for discussion, and creation of List of DC Comics vehicles and List of Marvel Comics vehicles would resolve most of them, I think. - jc37 22:28, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The thing is that most of these have valid redirect targets, and the topics themselves are just non-notable. Supermobile is more of an exception in terms of places we can cover it than the norm. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 19:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete - The Supermobile itself does not pass the WP:GNG, and it is such a minor piece of trivia in the Superman mythos that I feel that actually merging this to an article like the main Superman page would be giving undue coverage to it. Rorshacma (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Rorshacma. Does not meet the WP:GNG and the WP:TRIVIALMENTION isn't worth preserving. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:03, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Superman or Fortress of Solitude. There is be something that can be said about this and it is still a potential search term. Archrogue (talk) 22:57, 23 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) 14:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Israel–Seychelles relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article primarily based on 3 primary sources from the Israeli government. 2 of these merely confirm no embassies, a third is a factoid that Seychelles allowed Israelis to visit during the pandemic. There appears to be no third party of these relations. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 04:35, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Africa, and Israel. LibStar (talk) 04:35, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. The intro focuses on REFERENCES, while calling these sources. References are in an article. For these one does not have to search. AfDs should be focused on SOURCES, which are out there, per the golden NEXIST rule. A quick scan of the internet proves that there are third party sources, for example in Walla and Mako and Channel 13 of Israel. gidonb (talk) 04:57, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  the Channel 13 source seems an advertorial for Air Seychelles. LibStar (talk) 02:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By now you have reacted to everyone who disagreed with you yet never convinced why this article should be deleted. There should have been a strong case in the intro. We did not see that. Instead, you shopped in the references, now shop in the sources. The problem is that sufficient unchallenged sources remain. And the listed articles are just a small sample. Maariv regularly covers the subject. For example: Maariv1 Maariv2 Maariv3 Maariv4. gidonb (talk) 06:22, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Reliable coverage is easily discoverable from a cursory web search. This topic is significant enough on its own to warrant an article; it just hasn't been expanded beyond a stub yet. Yue💌 19:10, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Which sources did you find from your search? LibStar (talk) 22:08, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No doubt the article is poorly written and the sourcing is lacking, but that can be resolved without deletion. The topic meets WP:N and WP:RSs do exist for this topic. Eelipe (talk) 04:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources are you referring to? LibStar (talk) 04:31, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Article lacks citations to reliable, secondary sources, and I am not finding any either. Yilloslime (talk) 01:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep by the GNG. The article is supported by multiple sources, identified by me in in the comment above and within the article itself. More sources exist. No compelling case for deletion has been made. The deletion rationale mentions sources, yet only critiques references. It selectively focuses on three references that support the article's content, while ignoring the Israel Channel 12 news item that supports notability. On the downside: the article is rather short, yet meets the threshold for viability. gidonb (talk) 02:25, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Channel 12 or 13? LibStar (talk) 02:31, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Channel 12. gidonb (talk) 02:50, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: proper WP:BEFORE should have been done FuzzyMagma (talk) 22:34, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep has significant coverage such as here, here and here, so WP:GNG. 201.225.5.63 (talk) 03:17, 18 February 2025 (UTC)— 201.225.5.63 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  • • LOL no... Yilloslime (talk) 06:41, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      The IP is a suspected sockpuppet of Alon9393 Geschichte (talk) 15:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Several of the Keeps here lack P&G substance.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 09:05, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Being an Indo-Seychellois, I have made an effort to add a few citations to the page, including a JSTOR article accessed through the Wikipedia Library. I hope the page stays and continues to expand. Charlie (talk) 15:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Some historically interesting sources discussing Seychelles' connection to the politics of Mandate Palestine prior to the establishment of the state of Israel: Contesting colonial rule: Politics of exile in the Indian Ocean - see in particular p.702 that discusses the use of the Seychelles by the British to detain arrested members of the Arab Higher Committee. Also discussed in Out of Africa: letters of Jewish detainees in the British internment camps, 1944–1948 (p.447). Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 00:52, 26 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) 14:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – The sources present in the article already satisfies WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tapiola Bank (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

not meet GNG Loewstisch (talk) 14:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Loewstisch (talk) 14:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Finland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Snug and Cozi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Appears to have been a non-notable short-run TV show with absolutely zero coverage outside listing sites and the creator's own web-page Salimfadhley (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Salimfadhley (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:12, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I can only find brief usage of the words, nothing related to a TV show. What's now used for sourcing isn't enough. Oaktree b (talk) 16:02, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Mentioned on a dust jacket here, but that's about all there is. [20] Oaktree b (talk) 16:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
  1. Lewisohn, Mark (1998). Radio Times Guide to TV Comedy. London: BBC Worldwide. p. 619. ISBN 0-563-36977-9. Retrieved 2024-07-14 – via Internet Archive.

     The book notes: "Snug And Cozi UK - ITV (SCOTTISH) • CHILDREN'S SITCOM 13 x 10 mins • colour Series One (6) 1 Nov-6 Dec 1996 • Fri 4pm Series Two (7) 19 Aug-2 Oct 1997 • Tue then Thu mostly 4.05pm MAIN CAST Snug Cozi Emily Richard Vobes .... Nigel Cooner • Sarah Montgomery CREDITS writer Richard Vobes • executive producer Elizabeth Partyka • directors/producers Martyn Day (series 1), Haldane Duncan (series 2)"

     The book notes: "Thirteen doses of virtually dialogue-free slapstick comedy for children, depicting the misadventures of two bald aliens, Snug and Cozi, whose home planet, Squadge, is located one hundred million light years distant. Although inexperienced at flying, the pair borrow a rocket and blast off into the blackness, but after encountering a storm of asteroids they crash land on Earth. Here they are befriended by Emily, an 11-year-old schoolgirl, and she introduces them to human customs. In true alien style, of course, Snug and Cozi find it awfully hard to adapt, causing havoc at every turn in an almost identical manner to Laurel and Hardy, the true masters of the genre from 60 years earlier. (Snug is like Laurel; the larger one, Cozi, replicates Hardy's mannerisms.) Richard Vobes and Nigel Cooper, who played Snug and Cozi, are London-based children's entertainers. Note. The second series, announced as comprising ten episodes, stopped at seven."

  2. "TV triumph for pair's space tale". Lancing Herald. 1996-11-01. Retrieved 2025-02-24 – via British Newspaper Archive.

     The article notes: "Look out for a new children's television series called Snug and Cozi, which starts today (Friday) on ITV at 4pm. It is the brainchild of local actors Richard Vobes and Nigel Cooper, who live in Worthing. They made a pilot film of the programme and sold the concept to Scottish Television. This summer, Richard and Nigel were jet-setting between Worthing and Glasgow, filming six episodes of their new series, which follows the adventures of two crazy space travellers who crash-land on planet Earth. It's a slapstick comedy in the vein of Laurel and Hardy, aimed at children between the ages of four and nine. Snug and Cozi are also aiming their pop record, Pink Heads, will make it into the charts. They will also make a guest appearance on Wow, the latest children's Saturday morning show on ITV tomorrow (Saturday)."

  3. "Snug & Cozi in town". Mid Sussex Times. 1996-11-07. Retrieved 2025-02-24 – via British Newspaper Archive.

     The article notes: "TV stars of the future, Snug and Cozi, will be touching down in Burgess Hill when they appear at the town's special 'Christmas Day' celebrations. The intergalactic comedy double act have already been dubbed 'Laurel and Hardy in spacesuits' and their live action children's programme is aired every Friday at 4pm on Children's ITV. Their slapstick routine roadshow hits planet Earth at the bandstand at the Martlets shopping centre between 2–5pm on December 7."

  4. Less significant coverage:
     1. Calder, Colin (1997-02-26). "STV Steam Ahead Thanks to the Singing Kettle - Record pounds 60M profits". Daily Record. Archived from the original on 2024-07-14. Retrieved 2024-07-14.

        The article notes: "Apart from The Singing Kettle News - based in a newsroom - cartoons such as Hot Rod Dogs, Blobs and Snug and Cozi have all been big hits."

     2. Reguly, Eric (1997-02-26). "Caledonian deal helps Scottish TV to a high". The Times. Archived from the original on 2024-07-14. Retrieved 2024-07-14.

        The article notes: "A string of new programme commissions, ranging from McCallum to Snug and Cozi, boosted Scottish Television's operating profits from production by 43 per cent, to Pounds 3.3 million, their highest ever."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Snug and Cozi to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 05:10, 24 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) 14:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The coverage identified by Cunard is in my opinion sufficient to retain and improve the page. Thank you. -Mushy Yank. 19:18, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iona, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Getting nothing on this other than hits on prize pigs and cattle named "Iona". Appears to have been just a post office. Mangoe (talk) 13:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A2Z Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Haryana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:27, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 13:40, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inox Wind (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:NCORP due to lack of independent in-depth sources. Imcdc Contact 13:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 13:40, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maithan Alloys (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Jharkhand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Meghalaya-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:NCORP due to lack of independent in-depth sources. The mention about it being a polluter isn't really specific to the company itself but rather one of many. - Imcdc Contact 13:08, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 13:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Melstar Information Technologies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:20, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:20, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:NCORP due to lack of independent in-depth sources. Imcdc Contact 13:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 13:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rajesh Exports (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in WP:LISTED (or any other) case. Fails to meet WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 10:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:24, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:NCORP due to lack of independent in-depth sources. Imcdc Contact 13:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 13:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. The article relies mainly on self-published or promotional sources--Loewstisch (talk) 14:13, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is a Fortune Global 500 company with $30 billion in revenue. A preliminary Google search brings up results with analyst commentary [21] [22] and independent reporting [23] [24]. I encourage the nominator to provide evidence of following WP:BEFORE rather than simply copy-pasting the same nomination statement on every AfD. Yuvaank (talk) 21:25, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Cammermans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Biographical article cited only to IMDb and one primary source. Lacks independent significant coverage. Not clear this person meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, or WP:CREATIVE. As a Lugnuts created stub this could have been deleted by WP:PROD per the outcome at WP:ARBCOM, but rather than going that route I decided to take it here for comment in case the community wants to salvage it. Best.4meter4 (talk) 13:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 13:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Belgium. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Angel Unigwe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails Significant coverage, too promotional to be listed as an article, most references are mentions and not independent, Fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:GNG, references aren’t independent of the subject. Article was created by a Blocked user but that’s not the basic reason here. Kingsize8 (talk) 13:22, 26 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 26. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:33, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 13:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Ahmed (businessman) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A non-notable candidate in the early UK series of The Apprentice. Searching for reliable sources brings back nothing except a small amount of tabloid articles, which are not suitable. The article appears to have also been edited by the subject.

As the title has a "businessman" disambiguator, I don't think it's suitable to have this as a redirect to the main Apprentice article. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Television, Bangladesh, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AerianTur-M (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

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) 13:02, 26 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, Iraq, and Moldova. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Otteri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No refs on the page since 2013. I am having trouble WP:V the basic details on the page. It seems that there is a canal or stream of this name in Chennai but I'm having difficulty verifying that there is a community living in a place called Otteri. I would happily be wrong if someone can show Tamil or other language sources which meet the notability standards for inclusion JMWt (talk) 12:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Tamil Nadu. JMWt (talk) 12:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• delete as there is no claim of notability for a neighborhood. Mangoe (talk) 13:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Marlin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:BIO. Subject has been nominated and deleted before as seen here. Now made under another name. Subject still does not have sufficient independent in-depth sources to demonstrate notability. Article also seems to have a heavily promotional tone. Creator seems to be WP:SPA with a lot of delete articles here. Imcdc Contact 12:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Finance, and California. Imcdc Contact 12:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decision Analyst (company) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Has been nominated for PROD twice. Constant promotional issues. Imcdc Contact 12:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, and Texas. Imcdc Contact 12:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Stahlbaum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No substance found. Gauravs 51 (talk) 12:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Gauravs 51 (talk) 12:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I created this page as an exercise in learning how to edit. I picked the topic from a list of needed pages. (lots of pages linking to it). There is substance included in the info box. If you think this information should be repeated in the form of text on the page, I can do so. I was trying not to be repetitive and just include the same information in prose that is better captured in tabular form.

I'm happy to follow any standards at wikipedia. Fastmole (talk) 15:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Horse racing, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Setter Capital Inc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Was previously PROD nominated but disputed by article creator who is a WP:SPA and most likely has WP:COI. Imcdc Contact 11:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, Companies, and Canada. Imcdc Contact 11:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KTFL (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable TV station that was only on air for 5-6 years. No sources. Was kept under previous looser notability standards. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Arizona. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This is definitely a remnant of the far lower inclusion standards in this topic area of 2006 — and that conclusion might apply as much (if not more) to the first nomination itself as it does to the actual article. (I probably should also note that the first nomination, which came very quickly after the article was created, came two months after the eventual final sign-off but a month or so before the license was canceled; there was an assumption that the station was merely converting to digital, but that turned out to be the type of peering into the crystal ball that Wikipedia does not do.) About the only truly-P&G based rationale given by anyone in that discussion (at least by 2025 standards) was by the then-nominator (since a 2021 RfC, we no longer assume automatic notability for licensed stations even in the absence of significant coverage). Normally I'd call for a redirect to List of television stations in Arizona#Defunct full-power stations where KTFL is listed (and happens to mention all that can, or even needs to be, said about this station), but the call sign has been reassigned to a new station in Washington state owned by Spokane Public Radio, which if their station list is any indication relays KSFC. That may merit a redirect in that direction that does not require retaining the Arizona station article's page history. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Siesta (poem) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

PROD by Jfire with the rationale "Non-notable poem. No evidence of significant reliable source coverage." contested. I think it still holds true. Very little came up on a search, certainly nothing to indicate notability. Poem could probably be redirected to the author. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 11:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No significant coverage in reliable sources. I don't think redirection is a viable WP:ATD because Shampa Sinha is also at AfD and headed towards deletion as non-notable. Jfire (talk) 16:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guillermo Narvarte (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I didn't find significant coverages about the subject and it fails WP:GNG Dam222 🌋 (talk) 10:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Uruguay, and Venezuela. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - A google search shows that Narvarte coached several basketball teams, among them Argentine giants Boca Juniors, Peñarol of Mar del Plata, Mexicans Dorados de Chihuahua, Chileans Deportes Castro, and was the assistent coach of Argentina's National Team, which significantly won the bronze in Beijing 2008. This is the link to a Chihuahua's newspaper article in PressReader.com during his time with Dorados with Narvarte's biographical info: Narvarte es entrenador que dirigirá a los Dorados - Daniel Coronado (30 May 2024). --Darius (talk) 20:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Institute of Lens Arts Australia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

After being de-PRODded and improved, I still think the added sources do not satisfy the WP:N criteria. Most of the sources are either primary (interviews, business listings) or unreliable (LinkedIn, Facebook). More secondary, reliable sources are needed to prove its notability, and, as said in the PROD request, I could not find any sources like that. CorrectionsJackal (correct me) 09:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Schools, and Australia. CorrectionsJackal (correct me) 09:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamo Gaming (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The subject does not meet WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. No WP:SIGCOV found. Taabii (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, India, and Maharashtra. Taabii (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – none of the sources is reliable and independent and secondary, and there is no significant coverage of the person. The awards he has won are not notable, and there is no actual claim to notability. --bonadea contributions talk 10:38, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Sources like Financial Express, Times of India, and Hindustan Times (excluding the Mother's Day one, which satisfies WP:RSNOI's dogwhistles for advertorials) clearly satisfy GNG. TOI is (unfortunately) one of the best sources in India, and its concern at RSP is because their paid content's labeling is not immediately obvious; the source cited in the article that features Dynamo does not seem to have the paid disclosure and has clear neutral tone and byline, so I believe it is not an advertorial. I also doubt Bonadea's claim that the awards are not notable. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:50, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you, Aaron Liu, for your thoughtful assessment. I appreciate your detailed breakdown of the sources. Based on previous feedback, I have worked on improving the article by adding more independent and reliable sources and ensuring a neutral tone to address concerns about notability.

  I have now included sources such as Inside Sports India, FirstPostz, Sportskeeda, Hindustan Times, an official X post by the Government, and an official post by the PUBG Mobile YouTube channel. These further establish significant coverage of Dynamo Gaming from reputable media outlets and official sources.

  Regarding the awards, I have tried to verify their notability and coverage—if you have any recommendations for strengthening this section, I’d be happy to refine it further. Sarthak14331 (talk) 17:05, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  None of the sources you added help notability. Interviews aren't secondary, InsideSports looks sketchy and has very little information and thus no significant coverage, the government is a good source for that claim but does not provide significant coverage, PUBG mobile has a financial interest in promoting itself and thus isn't really secondary, and SportsKeeda is completely user-generated with little editorial credibility. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:37, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for your feedback, Aaron Liu. I understand the concerns regarding the nature of the sources, and I appreciate the clarification on what qualifies as significant coverage.

  I will look into adding more independent and in-depth sources that provide substantial coverage rather than just passing mentions or interviews. Based on your concerns, I will remove Sportskeeda and InsideSports as they do not meet Wikipedia's reliability standards. If you have any recommendations for reliable sources that could help establish notability, I’d be grateful for the guidance.

  Regarding the government source, while it may not provide significant coverage on its own, it does help verify certain claims. I’ll also review the other sources and see if there are better alternatives that align with Wikipedia’s guidelines on reliable secondary sources.

  Thanks again for your time and insights—I’ll work on improving the article accordingly. Sarthak14331 (talk) 17:59, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. MimirIsSmart (talk) 06:59, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your input. However, I have already improved the article by adding better sources and removing weaker ones like Sportskeeda. Additionally, I have fixed the promotional tone and added more reliable sources, including Hindustan Times,Times of India, IGN India, Financial Express, FirstPost, an official government X post have been included. If you believe the article still lacks notability, I would appreciate any guidance on additional sources that could help establish it. Sarthak14331 (talk) 09:21, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you claim that you removed the Sportskeeda sources or why you seem to still think you added sources that establish notability. In fact this all seems like RefBombing. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu:I apologize for the confusion regarding the removal of the Sportskeeda reference. Upon reviewing the edit history, I see that you were the one who removed it, not me. I misspoke earlier, and I appreciate you pointing that out. Thank you for catching that.

Regarding Dynamo Gaming, I believe it meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines due to its significant presence in the esports community and the Indian gaming industry. It has been covered by reliable, independent sources that highlight its achievements and impact.

Thank you for bringing up the concern about refbombing. I want to clarify that my intention was not to overwhelm the article with references but to provide sufficient evidence of Dynamo Gaming's notability. Each reference I included is from a reliable, independent source and directly supports the content in the article. If any of the references seem excessive or unnecessary, I’d be happy to review and adjust them. I’m open to your feedback and would appreciate any suggestions on how to improve the sourcing further. Sarthak14331 (talk) 14:20, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you respond to what I said above? Aaron Liu (talk) 12:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Another assessment of sourcing would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 08:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep:Since this discussion has been relisted for further sourcing assessment, I would like to present reliable sources that establish Dynamo Gaming’s notability.

Below are references from independent, reputable media outlets that provide significant coverage of his impact in the gaming industry:

• Indian Express: "Patt se Headshot" – What PUBG Mobile Star Dynamo Expects from Battlegrounds Mobile India – This article provides in-depth coverage of Dynamo Gaming, discussing his impact on the PUBG Mobile/BGMI community, his rise as a gaming influencer, and his influence on the Indian gaming industry.
• Firstpost: Indian PUBG Mobile Streamer Dynamo Talks About His Humble Beginnings & Inspiration – This article offers detailed coverage of Dynamo Gaming’s early career, his influence as a gaming streamer, and his contributions to the gaming community, thereby reinforcing his notability.
• IGN: Spotify Ropes in Popular Gaming Content Creator Aaditya 'Dynamo' Sawant to Host Podcast on Indian Gaming – This article discusses Dynamo's role in the gaming industry and his move into podcasting, further illustrating his impact and recognition as a gaming influencer.
• Times of India: Money Game – The Growing Biz of PUBG and Its Star Players – This article discusses the financial and business side of PUBG streamers, including Dynamo Gaming, highlighting his role as one of India’s top gaming influencers.
• Government of India: National Creators Award 2024 Nominees – Archived official MyGov page confirming Dynamo Gaming’s nomination for the National Creators Award 2024. This recognition by the Government of India highlights his influence in the gaming industry and contributes to his notability as a leading gaming content creator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarthak14331 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These sources demonstrate that Dynamo Gaming has received significant, independent, and in-depth coverage from reliable third-party publications. The coverage spans multiple aspects, including his influence on the Indian gaming community, his career progression, business impact, and recognition in mainstream media.

Per Wikipedia’s General Notability Guidelines (GNG), sustained coverage from reliable sources like The Indian Express, Times of India, Firstpost, and IGN establishes that Dynamo Gaming meets the criteria for an encyclopedia article. Given the depth and independence of these sources, I believe the article should be retained.

I welcome further discussion and feedback. Sarthak14331 (talk) 10:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bonadea, Aaron Liu, and Owen: It has been a few days since I provided additional reliable sources to establish Dynamo Gaming’s notability (Indian Express, Times of India, IGN, Firstpost, etc.). Since this discussion was relisted for further sourcing assessment, I would appreciate your thoughts on whether these sources meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria. Looking forward to your feedback. Thanks! Sarthak14331 (talk) 19:43, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yea these are pretty good, esp the IGN one
It would fare better for you to keep your responses shorter and less verbose Aaron Liu (talk) 19:54, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Spotify podcast does not give GNG? IgelRM (talk) 15:18, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IGN is not a Spotify podcast, though. The IGN article's exigence was Spotify but it goes to great lengths to describe Dynamo gaming, ergo we have enough unbiased and reliable information combined with other sources to satisfy GNG. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:27, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I confused the IGN article with something else somehow, and it indeed contributes little to GNG. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:28, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will use the Template:Source assess table format, but excuse that I have no time to figure out the proper template formatting right now.

The articles from Indian Express, Firstpost and Times News Network are all independent. For reliability, WP:NEWSORGINDIA apples to all. Significant coverage; the Indian Express focus is on Battlegrounds Mobile India impressions, Firstpost is an interview, TNN is on PUBG star players. I think only the TNN piece could count for GNG, which would be insufficient (Delete). IgelRM (talk) 15:16, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's also existing sources in the article I've previously mentioned above. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the coverage from Indian Express, Outlook India, and other reliable sources provides independent and significant coverage, meeting GNG. Additionally, the National Creators Award nomination further supports his notability. There are also other sources already included in the article that contribute to this. Happy to discuss further if needed! Sarthak14331 (talk) 23:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can't state you think so without saying why. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:41, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To much of here and there, need to build a clear consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 09:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep sources provided are reliable and in-depth coverage sufficient to meet GNG. The article absolutely needs cleanup, but that doesn't affect the notability of the subject. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 15:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for your input. I appreciate your acknowledgment that the sources meet GNG. I agree that the article needs cleanup, and I’m working on improving its structure, formatting and readability. If you have any specific suggestions or areas you think need the most attention, I’d be happy to address them. Sarthak14331 (talk) 16:40, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chennai City Gangsters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable unreleased film. See [25] and User talk:Gowthamaprabu#Chennai City Gangsters. Kindly draftify per agreement with article creator. DareshMohan (talk) 08:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, India, and Tamil Nadu. -Mushy Yank. 10:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming or shelved? If the latter, redirect, if the first redirect or draftify. But coverage might be judged sufficient for a Keep.... -Mushy Yank. 10:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is an upcoming film, but has no updates about the release yet. Gowthamaprabu (talk) 04:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify. No release date. Routine news on first look, teaser, trailer and so. Missing indepth coverage, failing WP:NFILM. Better to wait till closer or till release date (if ever announced) to get significant coverage with multiple critical reviews. RangersRus (talk) 09:39, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 09:04, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vanshika Parmar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non notable entertainer and model. No significant achievements to pass Notability.

Fails Wp:GNG and Wp:ENTERTAINER Zuck28 (talk) 08:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Entertainment, Travel and tourism, Beauty pageants, Fashion, India, Delhi, and Himachal Pradesh. Zuck28 (talk) 08:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Masini Situ-Kumbanga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Since the last AfD we do not grant inherent notability for simply competing in Olympics. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 08:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Democratic Republic of the Congo. LibStar (talk) 08:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, subject didn't simply participate but was actually an international medal-winner in the steeplechase at the 1987 Central African Games. This fulfills WP:NATH, now we just need to do the notoriously difficult task of finding contemporary African media archives at the time of his medal or Olympic / World Championship performances. --Habst (talk) 17:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Note that at the time of nomination, the article was only one sentence and didn't mention the Central African Games medal. This is because he won it under a different name (Masini Situ Mbanza), but I was able to confirm that they're the same person via '83 WC newspaper coverage: [26]. --Habst (talk) 18:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bella Vista Ambulance Services (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Should be considered for deletion if it lacks significant coverage in independent, reliable sources to establish notability, as it may not meet Wikipedia's general notability criteria for organizations. Edit.pdf (talk) 08:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Edit.pdf (talk) 08:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Arkansas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• comment Well, does it? And why does this nom read as if it were generated by AI? Mangoe (talk) 13:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Bella Vista, Arkansas#Public safety, where appropriate mention is made. And please use your keyboard and manually type your rationale next time. Nathannah • 📮 20:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sangonet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources to verify its notability and impact, as required by Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. Edit.pdf (talk) 08:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Edit.pdf (talk) 08:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Technology, and South Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spy Pictures (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent sources to establish notability, making it unsuitable for inclusion per Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. Edit.pdf (talk) 08:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Edit.pdf (talk) 08:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Music, Comics and animation, Advertising, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hunter (Indian beer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The parent company might satisfy Wikipedia's notability criteria for companies, but this beer brand does not. The sources do not provide sufficient substantial coverage of this brand required to satisfy ORGCRIT. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 08:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 08:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Products, and Madhya Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Were there a page for Som Distilleries, I would be inclined to merge the content into that page. As there is not, I would go for Delete per nom. nf utvol (talk) 12:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The People's Recorder (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I doubt the notability of the topic. I tried to find some secondary sources but I couldn't. The only thing us that it had been nominated by an award, but I am not sure whether that award is prominent or not. Current sourcing in the article is mainly primary. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, History, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zulkarnain Saer Khan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The individual Zulkarnain Saer Khan partook in the orchestration of a dossier denominated All the Prime Minister's Men. Consequent to the helping of this dossier, he was the recipient of a commendation entitled the Global Shining Light Awards. The Global Shining Light Awards is bereft of eminence or substantial prestige in any capacity. The mere attainment of the Global Shining Light Awards does not fullfill the criteria of notability (person), as the dossier All the Prime Minister's Men itself fails to consummately fulfill the stringent prerequisites of notability.

Furthermore, the article is an absolute dearth of elucidation absent his academic credentials. Additionally, the article harbors superfluous and extraneous verbiage, including allusions to assailments perpetrated against his brother. Hydronex (talk) 20:21, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Journalism, and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 20:26, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Politics, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:28, 4 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 4. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:32, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Just checked all the references and they seem above board. Meets point 3 of WP:NJOURNALIST, played a major role in creating a well known work (All the Prime Minister's Men). His career has also received WP:SIGCOV. Orange sticker (talk) 11:42, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Point three of Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals states:

"The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews."

But no other work by the individual in the article can be found apart from All the Prime Minister's Men, and All the Prime Minister's Men is neither a significant nor a well-known work. This means the individual does not fulfill point three of Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals. Hydronex (talk) 17:42, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: All the Prime Minister's Men is definitely a well-known work. It got wide coverage in Bangladeshi and some international media apart from Al Jazeera Media.[27][28][29][30][31] [32] Al Jazeera also won the top prize for "Best Human Rights Journalism" (investigation category) in the 8th annual Amnesty Media award for 'All the Prime Minister's Men'.[33] Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 09:17, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Notable investigative journalist in Bangladesh. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 08:54, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Notable journalist in Bangladesh. He is widely recognized for impactful investigative work with Al Jazeera and OCCRP. His contributions, media coverage, and awards meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria WP:NJOURNALIST.

— Cerium4B—Talk? • 11:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

— Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Cerium4B (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff) Koshuri ^(グ) 13:55, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Koshuri Sultan, He hasn’t asked for any support in his favour. He has just asked me to take a look. Maybe because this article is related to Bangladesh. [34] — Cerium4B—Talk? • 14:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: It is the responsibility of those who vote keep to provide a solid argument. Nothing can be gained from canvassed or paid votes. The article is highly promotional and lacks neutral tone. It overemphasizes achievements while downplaying controversies, making it more like a PR piece than an encyclopedic entry. The subject fails WP:NBLP, as most coverage comes from sympathetic or affiliated sources rather than independent, in-depth analysis. NXcrypto Message 04:34, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you Hrksmp for removing your Keep. NXcrypto Message 14:42, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:45, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Meets notability guidelines. Multiple, reliable sources in the article. ConstantPlancks (talk) 07:37, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source review would be helpful. But, at the least, this should be a redirect to All the Prime Minister's Men which I'm surprised editors arguing for Delete didn't mention.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• redirect to All the Prime Minister's Men as his most notable work.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 22:07, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table prepared by User:Worldbruce

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
DBC News				✔ Yes
Facebook		~ Okay for nickname, maybe for alma mater		✘ No
The Business Standard	Interview			✘ No
Prothom Alo			Two sentences	✘ No
Committee to Project Journalists	~ Much of it sourced from him			~ Partial
Sequel by same group ...			One sentence	✘ No
Global Investigative Journalism Network			Brief mention in list	✘ No
Police press charges ...			Brief mention	✘ No
Bangladesh investigative journalist’s ...				✔ Yes
UN expert, ...				✔ Yes
Ex-AL minister ...			Brief paraphrase	✘ No
How a Bangladesh minister ...			Doesn't mention him	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

• Redirect to All the Prime Minister's Men: Redirect seems like the best option right now. There are some sources that make SIGCOV, but not enough to warrant a standalone article. — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I agree that he meets WP:NJOURNALIST #3. As well as All the Prime Minister's Men, per the Business Standard article already cited in the article, he has contributed significantly to a report about Aynaghar, a secret internment centre - this is currently mentioned in this article only in the lede (it's what he won the Global Shining Light Award for), and a report alleging corrupt activity by another politician close to the former Bangladeshi PM (this is referred to in this article, 'Journalists in Bangladeshi diaspora say govt targets them through transnational repression', not currently cited as a source). This Benar News article also describes unevidenced allegations and slurs that have been made against him in an effort to discredit him, which is not yet mentioned in this article. Re the nominator's reference to "superfluous and extraneous verbiage", (1) this would be a matter of improving the article, not deleting it; (2) the attack on his brother was directly related to his journalistic work, and is described as such in the sources. (I'd note too that the spelling of his name on IMDB is Zulkarnayn Sayer Khan, and there may be other variants, which could make finding sources challenging). RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:40, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Miyagishima (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Former mayor of Las Cruces, New Mexico, which has a population of ~110k. Looking at the List of mayors of Las Cruces, New Mexico, the only one besides Miyagishima who has a Wikipedia page is Albert Johnson, who is obviously notable as the first black mayor anywhere in New Mexico. I don't see an argument for why Miyagishima rises above the notability level of a standard Las Cruces mayor. Between the news coverage already cited on the page and what I could find on Google, everything seems pretty run of the mill to me. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 01:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, Mississippi, and New Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:47, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I am going to put the suspicious timing of this proposal aside and try to comment on the merits of the proposal. Local politicians are not automatically notable, nor are they not automatically not notable. Reasons a local politician could be notable are longevity in service (Robert L. Butler, Margaret Doud, or Hilmar Moore) or notable activity in office (Betty Loren-Maltese or Rita Crundwell). Such activity need not be crimes. There are also people like Brandon Bochenski who meet GNG for unrelated reasons and just happen to now hold office. Points weighing in favor are that Las Cruces, New Mexico is the second most populous city in New Mexico. WP:POLOUTCOMES states that mayors of regionally significant cities can generally meet GNG. First person of Japanese-Mexican descent specifically. That is just too into the weeds to warrant its own article. If he were the first Asian-American to hold such a position in the state or multi-state region, I could possibly be persuaded that this could become a keep. Points weighing in favor of deletion are that he does not appear likely to meet GNG even with the points in favor. There is also fluff designed to mask a lack of notability. From 1998 through 2000, he was voted "Best County Commissioner" in a local newspaper readers' poll. or He is also the second person in Doña Ana County to have been elected both chairman of the Doña Ana County Commission and mayor of Las Cruces. When politicians meet notability criteria, this stuff does not appear in their articles.--Mpen320 (talk) 18:10, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The timing of this nomination was not a coincidence at all. I first found about Miyagishima's page when he was added to the 2026 NM-Gov race as a potential candidate. I immediately thought he wasn't notable and nominated the page for deletion. It feels very weird to see Jeff Singer--whose reporting I have cited on Wikipedia dozens of times at this point--spreading conspiracies about me. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:06, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reply. I was trying to get ahead of the allegation and instead just boosted it. Sorry. I created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mazi Melesa Pilip and got dogpiled on so I really should be more sensitive to that.--Mpen320 (talk) 21:09, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The expectation of a stand alone page for a local government official is significant coverage of the official's accomplishment and legacy while in office. The KOAT source cited in the article does have a couple short paragraphs about his accomplishments in office. However, there are a other sources that do discuss his legacy in office in more depth that are not currently referenced - this Channel 4 News segment, this KRWG story, and this story in the Las Cruces Bulletin. --Enos733 (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two of the articles you cited are retrospectives published after Miyagishima left office and the third is about him expressing interest in a return to politics. All three are from outlets local to the Las Cruces area. That's all coverage you would expect to see for a local elected official, and IMO all three are examples of run of the mill coverage. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:06, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While this would not count on its own, the subject was quoted in the NY Times, "It’s a challenge,” Mayor Ken Miyagishima said. “If you look at the history of America, they left England because they didn’t really want to be told what to do. I think that’s in the fiber of Americans.” He was the featured mayor in an AP article published in 2019 that talked about the rise of mayors of color (that was picked up by the Canadian Press. He was also featured in a story that ran in the Chicago Sun Times (and other papers) about Super PACs engaged in local elections. Yes, there is a lot of coverage by the local paper, but these other sources show interest outside of New Mexico. And while we generally discount coverage of a statewide political campaign, that coverage cannot be completely ignored. - Enos733 (talk) 16:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The NYT article only mentions him once and the AP article has one brief paragraph about him at the beginning of a longer story. The Chicago Sun Times article is better but it's mostly about the Super PACs, he's only mentioned incidentally. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:18, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that being the lead feature/vignette in a national publication is much more than run of the mill coverage, suggesting the subject is "worthy of notice" (WP:N). If all we had is one paragraph in source A and one paragraph from source B and one paragraph from source C, then I would agree with deletion or AFD. But in this case the NYT, AP, Chicago Sun Times (and other) stories expand on the local coverage, showing that the subject is noticed outside the local area. I also continue to think that the local coverage of this subject would be sufficient to meet GNG on its own. I also have not looked at every article that mentions the subject, which numbers in the 1000s, and even in the hundreds outside of New Mexico - Enos733 (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also add here there is no community consensus on the non-applicability of "local" sources. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 09:39, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per meeting WP:GNG with significant coverage independent of the subject in ABQ Journal, Las Cruces Sun News, Las Cruces Bulletin, local network affiliates, this AP piece, and coverage found by Enos733. Arguments about the size of Las Cruces or how many other LC mayors have wikipages are irrelevant. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply. Your point ignores Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill. This at face value covers all you mention except the AP article. If there were more coverage of that scale (ideally with more depth than provided by the AP article), it might be different. I do see another user mentioned other coverage, but I'm not persuaded there either.--Mpen320 (talk) 21:06, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I said I think the coverage is significant. That is a direct refutation of ROTM. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite the coverage you thought was significant. Most everything I found was the standard stuff you'd expect to see written about any mayor as part of regular news coverage. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 04:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Run of the mill is an essay, it is neither policy nor guideline, and where it does address politics it focuses on candidates for office. *Even if* one was to apply it to local government politics its *intent* would exclude news reports which covered the reading of minutes, or meetings held, not reporting and analysis of policy initiatives, debates or elections. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 06:21, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Assessing this from the perspective of whether or not local politicans qualify is misleading. In assessing notability, we do not judge the editorial choices of reliable sources, we assess whether they match our criteria (SIGVOC, independent, multiple) and the sources clearly do this. This is a mayor of an urban area of more than 100K+ for 16 years, passes the GNG, more than ample RS coverage, eg: Miyagishima might not be done with politics (2024) End of an era: Longest serving Las Cruces mayor reflects on 16 years in office(2023), Miyagishima becomes city’s longest serving mayor ever (2023), entry in Distinguished Asian American political and governmental leaders Greenwood Press, 2002 ISBN 9781573563253, pp131-132. Regards,--Goldsztajn (talk) 06:45, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  There's 1,500+ hits in a 15 year period with a "Ken Miyagishima" search on newspapers.com, including 100 from the Albaquerque Journal, the state's leading newspaper. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 07:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete We typically require mayors of smaller places to be notable above and beyond simply being a mayor of that place. Unfortunately I don't think the non-local articles presented here are significant coverage. SportingFlyer T·C 19:27, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  What are your thoughts about this article originally posted in the Albuquerque Journal and republished elsewhere about his potential run for governor? While we discount election-related coverage, this is full length coverage. - Enos733 (talk) 05:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  We specifically discount articles about potential elected officials during the campaign process, though. SportingFlyer T·C 06:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  In general, yes we do, but I do not believe we can completely dismiss it either. I believe that election coverage (either one or multiple articles) cannot by itself make a subject notable (an election is one event), but quality election coverage, in combination with other GNG sources, could push a borderline subject over the bar in meeting WP:N. - Enos733 (talk) 06:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I disagree. I don't think "mayor for awhile, but then got coverage because he explored a run for governor" is enough, just because "exploring a run for governor" is not enough to make anyone notable on their own. SportingFlyer T·C 07:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of all jatt surnames (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

All the sources seem unreliable, failed to find WP:GNG for this article. Also fails WP:SALAT as being far too broad. A category (if necessary) would suffice. jolielover♥talk 07:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sikhism and Lists. jolielover♥talk 07:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I also can't find any other sources which contain these names as a list, and the sources included are wikis and hence unreliable, and have no references. I think the existing Category:Jat and its sub-categories and sub-pages meet the need for sources of Jatt names - the pages I've looked at appear well-referenced. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete poorly written database. Azuredivay (talk) 18:13, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Poorly sourced WP:LISTCRUFT and completely non notable topic. Ajf773 (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kumawood (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No evidence of notability. Three deadlinks and all but one of the remainder are affiliated or interviews. Only the BBC source reliably confirms the existence of Kumawood. Searches reveal social media sources but nothing that amounts to a WP:RS. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:50, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, and Ghana.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:50, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Per nom. Nothing that configures notability or any relevant redirection to WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 10:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: if you search for news coverage about this award you will find plenty, especially from local news outlet. Have you consider these? FuzzyMagma (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Kindly keep. This article is notable and it speaks or provide insights to the Ghanaian local movie industry specifically in Kumasi. Jwale2 (talk) 19:18, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: [35] ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 01:44, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per the multiple academic sources discussing Kumawood as linked in the previous comment above, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:47, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus yet, but "keep" !voters are invited to share specific sources rather than asserting notability or linking to a list of search results.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:05, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. @Velella: It is always a good idea to try to fix dead links in any article you think might need to be deleted. InternetArchiveBot (talk · contribs) can do this automnatically. In this case, InternetArchiveBot was able to rescue three of the dead links. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh.... - as noted in the nomination, my own searches found many sources including those now restored. However, none of them, in my view, demonstated notability. Many are affiliated and even the source from "New African Cinema" only has two brief mentions which is well short of conveying notability. Several others are interviews with the CEO and clearly affiliated. I do, and will, restore sources where I believe that an article justifies keeping, but where the sources are clearly too weak, my efforts are better directed elsewhere IMHO.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   02:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As per Dclemens1971 above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I think the article could do with some editing - it appears that the name started as a privately owned company, but is now used to refer to a film industry based in Kumasi, Ghana. Many of the sources are about the film industry, rather than the private company - the book New African Cinema, for example, refers to "the category of "Kumawood films" ", and the "Kumawood genre". As well as the sources already in the article, the Modern Ghana news website has other stories about the state of the Kumawood industry. As Hydronium^~Hydroxide noted, there are many scholarly articles about it too, including "The new wave in Ghana's video film industry: Exploring the Kumawood model" [36]; "Aberration of cultures: A study of distortion of Akan cultures in Kumawood movies in Ghana" [37]; "Re-examining Digital Effects in ‘Kumawood’ Science Fiction Film Titled 2016" [38]; "The depiction of invectives and violence in Kumawood movies" (not online, but published in 2020 at the University of Education, Winneba; "Emergence of Local Language Film Production in Ghana" [39] is largely about Kumawood; etc. It definitely meets WP:GNG. If it's not kept, however, as WP:ATD I suggest merging to Cinema of Ghana, which currently has one line about Kumawood. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:18, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nwamaka Okoye (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is a lengthy article standing on just a single RS here[40]. The other sources do not show that this entrepreneur meets any notability guidelines. These sources here are interviews[41][42][43][44][45][46]. This[47] is written by the subject of this article. These here[48][49][50][51][52] are statements where the subject received trivial mentions. These are primary sources[53][54] Mekomo (talk) 06:19, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose the article has been updated since nomination. The links you yourself have proposed further support the notability guidelines, especially when we consider the region she operates in, which has a smaller media landscape than for Western individuals, and that does not always have documented sources that Wikipedia considers appropriate. Consider this feature of her speaking publicly about abolishing state descriptors to remove barriers to job access, or here speaking about electoral integrity. It was distributed by a major news outlet, which would be considered a RS elsewhere in the world. But because it is not hosted on an independent site, only Youtube it is not appropriate for Wikipedia. There are lots of other supporting information about Okoye that is distributed this way. I think the argument that there are not enough reliable sources to establish notability is particularly narrow as we should be conscious that not all regions have the sources that would be expected by a Western audience. If we deny on these grounds it risks biasing the Encyclopedia further, especially when it concerns those that are considered notable persons outside a Western perspective. The readers can come to their own conclusions. Nayyn (talk) 10:50, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Your update after the nomination does not address the notability concerns raised because you merely edited the existing information in the article without addressing the main issue. The three sources you presented are not different from what were already in the article in the sense that the new ones you presented are also interviews by a TV station. She was only interviewed commenting on a different thing and that does not improve her notability. Please checkout WP:INDEPENDENT. You're an autopatrolled user right holder that should have a deep understanding of what reliable and acceptable sources are. I analyzed all the sources in the article in the nomination statement and would like you to pick the sources and analyse them one after the other to show how they meet RS criteria. Mekomo (talk) 06:40, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not sure how a personal attack about me constructively furthers your argument. You've not engaged with the points I've raised in my commentary above. Nigeria has 230 million people, but only 81 women businesswoman from the 21st century on Wikipedia. Nayyn (talk) 19:12, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Women, and Nigeria. Mekomo (talk) 06:19, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Agree with @Nayyn's argument about a) the article being improved significantly and b) some aspects of notability needing to take context into consideration. Even a nationally-important entrepreneur in sub-Saharan Africa isn't going to routinely have Washington Post or Le Monde articles written about them. Deleting this would be jumping the gun. — Arcaist ^{(contr—talk)} 13:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please indicate those new sources that have 'improved significantly' the notability and those 'aspects of notability needing to take context into consideration'. Mekomo (talk) 06:53, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Largely sourced to interviews, I don't see notability. I suppose founding an award could be notable, but with no coverage of the award either, I'm not seeing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:00, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carnatic expansion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The subject clearly fails WP:GNG. It violates WP:NOR and WP:SYNTH, There is no mention of anything called Carnatic expansion in the sources, It is entirely written in WP:FAN POV. Mr.Hanes Talk 08:43, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Rawn3012 (talk) 04:20, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article is reliable and doesn't need to be deleted, the events mentioned in the article are true and need to be added more, "Carnatic expansion" shows the military, cultural and political impact from Karnataka in the Indian Subcontinent, like the "Karnatas Beyond The Forntiers" by P. B. Desai:

In Bengal, the Chhumdakas-Nagas, the Rashtrakutas of Orissa, the Tailapa Vamshis, the Karnatas of Mithila, the Senas of Bengal^[1]

Additionally, the Vijayanagara Empire which expanded over the South was known as Karnata or Kannada-desha^[2] through its dominions, making it one of the sutibale point to keep the page the Carnatic expansion

And there several things which can be added to this article Carnatic expansion, rather than deleting it

Keep: It includes well known, well documented historical events. Incidentally the influence of Karnataka on Harsh, the ruler of Kashmir is mentioned by Kalhana explicitly in Rajatarangini in several places. Chapter 7 shlokas 926-927, 935-937, 1119-1124.^[3]. It is also acknowledged by Sir Aurel Stein in his introduction. Malaiya (talk) 01:20, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't justifies the issues I've mentioned above. There's no such thing called Carnatic expansion in the sources which includes all the historical events in the article, It's full of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH mess. Rajatarangini is not a reliable source, see WP:PRIMARY. Mr.Hanes Talk 05:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: As per nomination AlvaKedak (talk) 11:40, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Warith Al Maawali (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:BLP, I have cleaned out of the article a string of sources that are press-release or come from bad newspapers. Most of the sources only mention Warith Al Maawali and fully describe the company. There's a risk of a WP:COI editor. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Oman. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• note *note the article was reviewed by editor FULBERT today, as was my other article Kentucky Blood Center. Both were immediately nominated for deletion by an editor who has not written any articles of his own. I will ask checkuser to investigate the situation Pollia (talk) 20:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For someone who has been on wikipedia for less than half a year, you have an overly extensive knowledge of wikipedia rules and policies, as well as an expanded understanding of rules and policies.

As for the nomination for deletion, if you take a closer look at WP:N and WP:BIO you'll be surprised that the article qualifies. And when you familiarize yourself with WP:RS you will learn that not all links have to meet all the criteria, some may in some cases support the information provided Pollia (talk) 17:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Subject meets WP: GNG. I don't even have to pull up Arabic sources to establish notability.

From Bill Marczak, John Scott-Railton, Adam Senft, Irene Poetranto, and Sarah McKune. “Pay No Attention to the Server Behind the Proxy: Mapping FinFisher’s Continuing Proliferation,” Citizen Lab Research Report No. 64, University of Toronto, October 2015 (url):

We found a FinFisher server running on IP address 37.139.27.xxx, which is pointed to by two subdomains of to70.org, a domain name associated with an Omani company called “Eagle Eye Digital Solutions LLC” through historical WHOIS. The domain is currently registered to “Omantel,” the largest telecom in Oman. Eagle Eye Digital Solutions LLC was founded by, and is run by, Warith Al-Maawali. Leaked emails describe Warith as part of Oman’s Ministry of Interior, as well as a reseller of FinFisher products. Other sites apparently run by Eagle Eye include a major Omani online forum, “oman0.net.” Eagle Eye founder Warith Al Maawali says the forum is “one of the most active sites with the largest user-base in Oman.”

From Wolters Kluwer. "Handbook of Blockchain Law: A Guide to Understanding and Resolving the Legal Challenges of Blockchain Technology", 2020 (url):

In February 2019, Warith Al Maawali, a security and cryptocurrency researcher, reported a security vulnerability with the Coinomi cryptocurrency wallet desktop app. Al Maawali reported that Coinomi provided a wallet recovery process, through which users could enter a previously generated twelve-word recovery phrase to regain access to their wallets. However, Coinomi failed to disable a Google spellcheck feature so that anyone able to intercept web traffic could capture the recovery phrase as plain text and take over the user’s Coinomi wallet and all its contents. Al Maawali claimed to have lost between USD 60,000 and USD 70,000 in digital assets from his Coinomi wallet, but he was not able to prove that this plain text spellcheck flaw was responsible.

HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:47, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There's also a couple of things that I'd like to get out of the way before this discussion proceeds any further. Dmitry, you need to quit it with this "risk of a WP: COI editor" nonsense. Either take your concerns to WP: COIN or stop making baseless accusations. We do not delete articles because they might have potentially been possibly made by someone who might have a conflict of interest: we delete them on account of a lack of available sourcing. I do my best to assume good faith from other editors, but your reputation precedes you and my tolerance for these kinds of shenanigans is razor thin. Focus on the sourcing, do a WP: BEFORE instead of mass deleting citations from the article, and stop attacking other editors without proper evidence. Your poorly researched and poorly conceived nominations harm the encyclopedia and create unnecessary work for everyone else. HyperAccelerated (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I will overlook the offensive words you say. All edits and accusations I make are directly sent to the admins or persons responsible for these causes. And for each one I also offer explanations and demonstrate with arguments why this editor can be a COI. It only remains to thank you for this message and no more..--Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 11:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Delete Checked the first 10 references and the "Handbook of Blockchain Law". For the 10 references, there is two pdf (the same) which is a brochure on the subject, it is pure WP:PUFF. There are several self-written profiles, there is an about me web page for some forum site (nothing to do with him), there is a couple of press-release and PR style sites, there is a single references on one of the pdf and there is other passing mentions. There is also an X of Y article, top 50 ceo which is PR. On the book, its another mention, that he reported a bug. The other is a passing as well. None of these are secondary sources on a BLP. It is all self-generated run-of-the-mill muck. The man is non-notable. Fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV. Looks like UPE. scope_creep^Talk 16:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per Dmitry's nomination𝔓^420°𝔓^Holla 19:41, 23 February 2025 (UTC) [reply]

• Comment I hate to have to do this at an AfD but I am getting really fed up with the lack of good-faith towards article nominators. Plus, I really don't like any kind of aggressive language like this "my tolerance for these kinds of shenanigans is razor thin". Disagreements are a fact of collaborative writing but that doesn't mean that we have to use aggressive language towards each other. Please stop with the veiled threats. Thank you for understanding.𝔓^420°𝔓^Holla 19:50, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Indefinitely blocked for disruption, UPE, use of LLM and suspected sock puppetry. --Goldsztajn (talk) 10:39, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This subject fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO and this article fails WP:NOTRESUME. The first source is literally the subject's resume. The sourcing does not really improve. We have his own website ([55]), primary source Q&A ([56]), user-generated content ([57], [58]), articles that read like press releases ([59], [60], [61], [62], [63], [64]), articles that are press releases ([65], [66], [67]), trivial mentions ([68], [69]) and articles that do not even mention the subject ([70]). As for the sources offered above in the discussion, the book has a single trivial mention ([71]), as does the UToronto report (see page 28). Despite a bad-faith nomination by a disruptive editor, this article is still a heavily promotional exercise in WP:ADMASQ for a non-notable individual and should be deleted. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:56, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that the nominator has been blocked for "disruptive editing: socking and likely undeclared paid editing".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Evan Luthra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The article appears to be a **self-promotional piece** rather than an encyclopedic entry. The subject, Evan Luthra, does not meet Wikipedia’s **notability guidelines (WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:ENTREPRENEUR)** as there is a **lack of reliable, independent secondary sources** that provide significant coverage. Most of the sources cited are **self-published, PR-driven, or affiliated with the subject**, failing WP:RS.

Additionally, this page was **previously nominated for deletion in 2018**, where it was found to lack verifiable independent coverage. The recreation of the article does not demonstrate a significant change in the sourcing or notability of the subject. Instead, it continues to serve as a **promotional page** aimed at building a personal brand rather than providing verifiable, neutral, and encyclopedic content.

As per Wikipedia’s guidelines, articles that primarily exist for **self-promotion, lacking reliable sources, and failing notability criteria** should be deleted. Therefore, I propose this article for deletion. Spider1217 (talk) 07:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Businesspeople. Spider1217 (talk) 07:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: As per nomination. Terrible article of a non notable internet personality with paid news articles as references. Zuck28 (talk) 08:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Baqi:) (talk) 10:25, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cryptocurrency-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Questioning the reliability of some sources. Many mention Luthra being included in Forbes 30 Under 30 but I can't find this factualized on any Forbes site? Hmr (talk) 17:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Szwimer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Coverage is limited. A few major publications wrote about his podcast, but all around the same time when it first launched so it's basically all advertisements and not particularly substantial. His name also comes up in coverage of the end of Arthur because it was announced in an episode of the podcast, but none of the coverage is focused on him or the podcast. NACTOR asks for "significant roles in multiple notable [projects]" (emphasis mine), and it seems to me that he only has one. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Canada. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Comics and animation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I think he does meet WP:NACTOR - as well as his significant role in Arthur (TV series), he was in all 26 episodes of the 2 series of The Tofus, as Phil, the best friend and confidant of the main character, Chichi. That seems like a significant role to me. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jerome F. Keating (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The subject of the article lacks the widespread coverage in independent secondary sources required by WP:GNG. He is best known for a blog, but there is very limited coverage of that in any significant sources.  GuardianH  05:33, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Transportation, Taiwan, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chae Hong-nak (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Searching by his name in English and Korean (채홍락) did not yield coverage to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 05:08, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and South Korea. LibStar (talk) 05:08, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, I'm not sure where you were searching for coverage? Because I see plenty of quality hits for the subject, for example:

1. "汚點(오점)신기록 쏟아낸 韓國(한국)마라톤 경향신문 | 1982.11.01 기사(뉴스)" [Korean Marathon Breaks New Record]. newslibrary.naver.com (in Korean). [This incident, which is the first of its kind in the history of Korean marathons, was a nonsense caused by overheated cheering. On this day, the joint first place men's runners, Jeong Man-hwa (Jeong Man-hwa) and Cai Hong-rak (Cai Hong-rak, both Konkuk University), finished the race together in 2 hours, 21 minutes, and 8 seconds, but they were drinking their own beverages...]
2. "「韓國新(한국신)의 황금열매」없어지고… 마 라톤「食慾(식욕)」잃었다 동아일보 | 1984.11.10 기사(뉴스)" ["The Golden Fruit of Korean Newness" is Gone… Marathon "Appetite" Lost]. newslibrary.naver.com (in Korean). [In this competition, Chae Hong-rak also set a Korean record with 2 hours, 15 minutes, and 16 seconds. However, in the Los Angeles Olympics in August, the Seoul International Marathon in September, and the National Sports Festival in October... In the Los Angeles Olympics, Lee Hong-ryeol finished 37th with a time of 2 hours, 20 minutes, and 56 seconds. Chae Hong-rak ...]
3. "마라톤 韓國新記錄(한국신기록)꿈 또좌절 경향신문 | 1983.03.21 기사(뉴스)" [Marathon Korean New Record Dream Frustrated Again]. newslibrary.naver.com (in Korean). [In the 54th Dong-A Marathon held on a 195km full course, national representative Cai Hong-rak (Cai Hong- rak , 22, Konkuk University) failed to control his pace in the second half, falling 18 seconds short of the Korean record of 2 hours, 16 minutes, and 15 seconds set by Moon Heung-ju (Moon Hong-ju) in 1974...]
4. "東亞(동아)마라톤 魔(마)의 구간서 함정에 빠진 신기록 동아일보 | 1983.03.21 기사(뉴스)" [New record caught in trap in the Dong- A Marathon's magic section]. newslibrary.naver.com (in Korean). [Chae Hong-rak (蔡鴻洛), the leader who was dreaming of a new record by 5 seconds ahead of the Korean record up to the 40 km mark, overpaced the remaining 2.195 km... Chae Hong-rak was conscious of the ranking in this section. 15 km...]
5. "「15分壁(분벽)」넘나드는 東亞(동아)의 健脚(건각)들 實戰(실전)선 누가… 동아일보 | 1983.03.18 기사(뉴스)" [Who will be the first to take the lead in actual combat among the healthy people of East Asia who have crossed the “15-minute barrier ” ?]. newslibrary.naver.com (in Korean). [Here are Jeong Jong-mo (Jeong Jong-mo, Hanjeon), Yoo Jae-seong (Yoo Jae-seong, Dongyang Nylon), Chae Hong-rak (Chae Hong-rak, Konkuk University), Nam In-gyu (Nam In-gyu, Jinro)... National representative Chae Hong-rak holds the record of 2 hours, 21 minutes, and 8 seconds. He ran...]
6. "男子(남자)우승 蔡鴻洛(채홍낙) 4번째 도전…前半(전반)스피드못내 아쉬워 동아일보 | 1983.03.21 기사(인터뷰)" [Men's Champion Cai Hong-Lak's 4th attempt... Regrettable lack of speed in the first half]. newslibrary.naver.com (in Korean). [Men's Champion Cai Hong-rak's 4th attempt┉ First half speed was lacking, but Cai Hong-rak , who crossed the finish line in 1st place , was drenched in sweat... Cai Hong-rak 's strengths are his overflowing fighting spirit and strength. However, his lack of speed is his flaw...]
7. "마라톤 有望株(유망주) 蔡鴻洛(채홍낙) 경향신문 | 1983.03.21 기사(뉴스)" [(Chae Hong-rak) ( Chae Hong-rak , photo) was very disappointed with the result that was caused by excessive greed. Before participating in the race, Chae Hong-rak set a goal of 16 minutes for every 5 km (km) lap time, but made the mistake of sprinting too early at the 33 km (km) mark...]. newslibrary.naver.com (in Korean).

--Habst (talk) 14:32, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Although these articles were readily available, it takes significant time to translate and compile them. This is why I think the 52+ PRODs and AfDs on non-English-speaking Olympic athletes in the last month, when there's usually only one or two per week, should be procedurally closed, or delayed, or lumped into one mass nomination or something like that. It's just too heavy a burden and we can't expect that a thorough source-searching operation can be conducted on each of them within a week. I want to start incorporating these sources in the article, but I can't even do that now because there are so many outstanding PRODs to deal with. --Habst (talk) 15:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Loun Srdanović (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This player certainly exists, but I cannot find anything close to WP:SIGCOV on him. Given that this same article appears to have been deleted (or draftified) just five days ago without any meaningful improvement, it suggests that there isn't much out there. Anwegmann (talk) 05:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Serbia, and Switzerland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Since the drafttication process was not respected. Svartner (talk) 16:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vogue la galère (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Film article sourced entirely to IMDb. Not clear this passes WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. This was one of tens of thousand of stubs created by Lugnuts, and after the WP:ARBCOM outcome of that case it was determined those could be deleted by WP:PROD. However, rather than go that route, I decided to bring it here for discussion in case the community feels this might be salvageable. Best.4meter4 (talk) 04:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 04:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• [Redirect to Raymond Rouleau] [is warranted]: for now. -Mushy Yank. 08:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  [Rather] Keep. See below. I didn't have time to check sources as I should..... -Mushy Yank. 20:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I'm finding some mention of this in Google Books, in snippet view here and here, but I'd need someone with access (and fluency) to really give a better look at one. The first does appear to be a review as Google translate shows that part of what shows up in the search gives an opinion/interpretation of the film. This one does as well.

That aside, I'm seeing more promising results for the play the movie is adapting, like this, this, this, and this. I get the impression the film is probably notable, but coverage is kind of buried by time and the play seems to be more notable. My recommendation, if people are amenable to it, is to change this from an article on the film to an article about the play, where we cover the film in passing. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would support that direction if someone is willing to take that project on.4meter4 (talk) 20:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is signifiant coverage in reliable sources, some reproduced here for example: http://php88.free.fr/bdff/image_film.php?ID=7085. I'd rather keep this but the play, Aymé's first (https://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/1951/12/14/marcel-ayme-avec-vogue-la-galere-lance-une-revolte-une-querelle-classique-et-deux-jeunes-comediens_2069923_1819218.html) if I am not mistaken, should also have a page.-Mushy Yank. 21:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uranio Pereira (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Brazilian athlete who only played for modest teams in Paraguay (General Caballero SC, 2 de Mayo, Sportivo Trinidense). The databases show few matches played, there is no corresponding article on es.wiki and no sign of WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 04:02, 26 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) 04:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Paraguay-related deletion discussions. Svartner (talk) 04:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Hasn't played enough to have enough written about him. Creator is blocked. Fails WP:GNG – RossEvans19 (talk) 12:28, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Collabrification (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article about non-notable neologism which seems to exist to promote a research direction from one specific research group. TheDragonFire (talk) 03:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. TheDragonFire (talk) 03:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:29, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not finding any sources that establish notability. There are some papers from Michigan, but they appear to be the researchers who invented this term and their papers promoting this research direction have very few citations. HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:34, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. This article was PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Back when I worked in the nonprofit sector, my colleagues and I used to compete to come up with the dumbest buzzword portmanteaus. I once suggested "collaboraction" until we learned it was a real thing. This is... not a real thing. This is some academics trying to make fetch happen. The sources do not support a WP:GNG, WP:NEO or WP:WORDISSUBJECT pass. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cabin Creek, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

I have mixed feelings about this, in large part because it is an African-American place, and the documentation on these tends to be sketchy. The issue here, however, is that once again the article does not accurately relate what the thesis (which is the only source I could find outside GNIS) says about the place. The key failure is in the statement that "it was the home of several families [of] free African Americans", because it says that about the whole Cabin Creek Settlement. The "Scott's Corner" part pertains only to the store, due to the name of the proprietor. It doesn't actually say there was a town there, and it doesn't say that people lived at the corner. At least, that's how it reads to me. And it's basically an isolated intersection now, and furthermore, the aerials indicate that the two houses on the NE corner are recent, and that there was once another building on the SE corner which disappeared around 2010. It might have been the store at some point, or maybe not. It would be nice to find something else to go by, but for instance the county history (which was written early as these things go) doesn't mention it. So reluctantly I think this will need to go unless someone can find better verification. Mangoe (talk) 02:40, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:46, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced search for:  "Cabin Creek, Indiana"
In books/documents  Google Books Internet Archive  · WorldCat refseek
In the news  Google News: recent  · archives Free English newspaper archives
In academic/legal journals  and reference works  Google Scholar: academic  · legal The Wikipedia Library Oxford Reference  · JSTOR PUBMED Central Internet Archive BASE  · Persée
World Wide Web pages  Google Web Search  · Advanced Search Searx 1  · 2  · 3  · 4 Bing  · DuckDuckGo  · Startpage Yahoo
Images (free)  Google  · Flickr

• Randolph now, eh? I was wondering what county was going to be next after Jay. ☺

  The interesting thing is that the Tucker History does have an entire section (p.134) on the "Cabin Creek Colored Settlement" which has a lengthy laundry list of Scotts. It seems that Cabin Creek, Indiana (running from 40°10′07″N 085°09′45″W / 40.16861°N 85.16250°W / 40.16861; -85.16250 (mouth of Cabin Creek, Indiana) on the White River to 40°03′50″N 85°04′05″W / 40.064°N 85.068°W / 40.064; -85.068 (headwaters of Cabin Creek, Indiana)) is the real subject here. It has a fair number of sources both as the settlement and as a creek.

  The severalfold irony is that the rôte GNIS mass-importers did not give it to us because (a) the GNIS record had it marked as "stream" not "ppl", and (b) the second GNIS record for Cabin Creek that said it was an alternative name for Lamb Ditch, which leads from Cabin Creek at 40°08′38″N 85°08′02″W / 40.144°N 85.134°W / 40.144; -85.134 (mouth of Lamb Ditch, Indiana) past its name at 40°07′16″N 085°07′46″W / 40.12111°N 85.12944°W / 40.12111; -85.12944 (label of Lamb Ditch, Indiana) right to this "Scott Corner", which in turn the GNIS said was "canal" with no clue that it was part of the Cabin Creek true populated place that is in the history books.

  Uncle G (talk) 04:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

---

• Keep. Reviewing the sources above I think there is enough to support an article or at least a section in White River. Eluchil404 (talk) 02:52, 25 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!} 03:08, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Caitlin Robba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find any WP:SIGCOV of this Gibraltarian women's footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 02:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Europe. JTtheOG (talk) 02:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Den (room) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A very informal term of dubious WP:GNG. Sole ref is to a dictionary - sure, this term is used in such a context, but it doesn't mean it is notable. Most of the stubby article is pure WP:OR. My BEFORE fails to find anything that's reliable and SIGCOV meeting. While arguably there should be a parent concept to stuff like Man cave or historical Cabinet (room), we need to chose a term that's used by scholarly sources, and build an article based on them. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Social science. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• As it's currently written, this fails our notability guidelines on GNG and DICDEF grounds. I feel like it should be salvageable, but the name is so common I have not yet been able to find the correct search which would bring up any related sources. SportingFlyer T·C 05:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, but "renovate". Better Homes and Gardens has articles about dens ("No, a Den Room Isn't the Same Thing as a Living Room or Family Room", "Return of the DEN" [subscription required]), CBC has articles about there being no legal definition of a den in British Columbia[72] and Ontario[73][74]. Mental Floss discusses the question that has stymied the most profound philosophers: Living Room vs. Family Room vs. Den: What’s the Difference? Clarityfiend (talk) 11:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Filomena Marturano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Unreferenced film article. Not clear this work passes WP:NFILM or WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 01:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 01:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• [Merge with Filumena Marturano] [is warranted]: for now -Mushy Yank. 08:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC) [Opposed to deletion: coverage, notable screenwriter and members of cast].-Mushy Yank. 19:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)--->After further findings, Keep per WP:NFIC, the role of Tita Merello being considered one of her best film appearances.-Mushy Yank. 20:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. -Mushy Yank. 08:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note to nominator: Please slow down film nominations for a while. It's very hard to check all those old films. -Mushy Yank. 08:37, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Changed vote after new sources with enough coverage were added for this 1950 film.Redirect to Filumena_Marturano#Film_adaptations or Delete. Fails to meet WP:NFILM. No significant coverage on the film. RangersRus (talk) 19:37, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Added ref to significant coverage (including 3 paragraphs in a book).-Mushy Yank. 20:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bybit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Bringing this here because I'm not sure the 2025 hack is sufficient to overcome the multiple deletion discussions. NB: not even close to a G4 and no concern with the creation by an established editor, I just think this needs clear resolution before further time and energy is dedicated thereto. Star Mississippi 01:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Finance, Organizations, Companies, and United Arab Emirates. Star Mississippi 01:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I don't think there's any serious doubt that the Bybit hack meets WP:GNG, as the undisputed largest crypto exchange hack ever (yet!) linked to North Korean state actors it has been extensively covered in numerous reliable sources (NYT, BBC, CNBC, CNA etc) and the content in the article is already appropriately sourced. There is an open question about whether the article should focus on the exchange as a whole or only the hack (cf. 2024 WazirX hack), but that's already being discussed at Talk:Bybit and it's a (potential) requested move, not deletion. Jpatokal (talk) 02:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The subject is one of the largest crypto exchanges in the world, which experienced the largest crypto exchange hack ever so far. Coverage from maybe different notable news outlets. It would be a disservice to investors to make this solely about the hack. There is information in the history section with FTX that is unrelated to the hack and I'm sure investors would like to read about the company prior to sending funds and investing on this platform. There is also way less notable exchanges such as ShapeShift that have standalone pages. Lekkha Moun (talk) 06:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Please read WP:NCORP, being of service to investors has absolutely nothing to do with providing information to investors. Star Mississippi 12:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You are right, it's irrelevant. I was referring to more "context" for readers, but verbalized it the wrong way. Veldsenk said it well below: It would give more context to the reader and there is no benefit in converting it into just a hack article as per WP:PAGEDECIDE. Lekkha Moun (talk) 14:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Bybit is the 2nd largest Cryptocurrency exchange in the world, according to coinmarketcap.

BTW, there was absolutely no reason to delete it 3 months ago or defaming me, as you can read here. IdanST (talk) 09:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep meets WP:GNG. Even before this hack, major publications like Bloomberg ([75], [76], [77], [78], [79], [80], [81], [82], [83]) and others have been covering it for years. It was the second largest crypto exchange (after Binance) before this hack [84]. There is some academic coverage about it as well and due to on-going investigation Bybit will continue to receive coverage in reliable sources. Per WP:PAGEDECIDE, an article about Bybit makes more sense because it would give more context to the reader (there is no benefit in converting it into just a hack article and scale back the scope). Veldsenk (talk) 13:31, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I disagree with the conclusion from the prior discussion. The company was notable prior to the hack. After the hack, there is virtually no question that there is more than enough coverage to establish notability. Giannini Goldman (talk) 20:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ismael Mahmoud Ghassab (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

3 of the 4 provided sources are databases and insufficient for meeting WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. The other source [85] doesn't appear to be SIGCOV. No evidence of actual third party indepth coverage. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Jordan. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Did you search any Jordanian news sources? BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:20, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I can't read Arabic. Did you do any searches? LibStar (talk) 02:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not the nominator. If you can't search for sources (WP:BEFORE), why should you be able to nominate this for deletion? BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've searched for sources and can't find any. If you are supporting keep (which I guess you do), please provide sources. Thanks in advance. LibStar (talk) 02:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've searched for sources – in Arabic? Because any coverage that exists would be there, not in English. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Please provide evidence of sources. LibStar (talk) 02:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As I said previously I can't read Arabic. Please stop playing games. LibStar (talk) 02:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment part of WP:BEFORE is to make a reasonable effort to search for sources. Because the nominator didn't search Arabic sources for coverage for this Jordanian athlete, I think a procedural keep is appropriate. On the merits, we'd expect someone who finished 13th at a global marathon championship, from a country that rarely performs that well, to have local coverage. --Habst (talk) 13:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Expect to have local coverage? We need to see evidence of it. LibStar (talk) 22:04, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andrey Almeida (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Another case of a player with few professional appearances recorded in the databases (2 matches for Soccerway [86], 2 for ogol.com.br [87]). The article states that the athlete played for Inter Turku, but without the appropriate references. Too little to establish WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 01:27, 26 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) 01:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Hasn't played enough to have enough written about him. Fails WP:GNG – RossEvans19 (talk) 02:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Super culture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

"Super culture" doesn't seem to be an established term in anthropology. The book referenced actually says "To correspond with the term "sub-culture", a new term "super-culture" might be invented..." which suggests to me this is a term that was only used by few people. I don't think this warrants a redirect to "Culture", given that "Super culture" would be a very uncommon search term if it's not in use in anthropology. Kylemahar902 (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Behavioural science and Social science. Kylemahar902 (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect to the paragraph in Culture#Description, where subculture and counterculture are already defined. A single sentence to acknowledge little more than the fact that the term has been created should be sufficient. The sentence in the nominated article "Super-culture is a culture encompassing several subcultures with common elements" with its source should be sufficient. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:40, 20 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!} 01:15, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Cross (character) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

To quote myself from this recent move discussion:

As for your point about the character, I think my initial proposal already covers that; the page was for the character, but that article was deleted via AfD. Three years isn't a ton of time for notability, especially for a character whose popularity peaked decades ago. I see that [this article] exists (and that you created it), but I'm not sure that would survive a second AfD. Most of the sources in that article are about the movies/TV series rather than the character himself, and I'm not sure the ones that are about the character are reliable (especially not Passionate in Marketing, nor the reference to another Wikipedia article which I know for a fact is against the rules).

The article's creator responded to that message saying they were "sure there are many tons of reliable source about the character him self online just need a lil bit of searching", but in the handful of weeks since that comment, the only additional sources they've added are also primarily about the franchise and not strictly the character. I think the character is generally underdiscussed in these sources, and that there is still not enough material for a standalone article. I would not oppose a merger of a smaller selection of sourced material to Alex Cross, and regardless I think this should redirect there. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:20, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep the main character in a book series as prolific as the cross series is (32 books 3 movies and a tv show) seems notable enough although sourcing is an issue Theking49393 (talk) 03:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well if it can't overcome the sourcing issue, it shouldn't be kept. We can't just assume notability, and the franchise already has multiple other articles. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 04:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: You referenced our previous discussion regarding the move of the other page. The article's creator responded to that message saying they were "sure there are many tons of reliable source about the character him self online just need a lil bit of searching", but in the handful of weeks since that comment, the only additional sources they've added are also primarily about the franchise and not strictly the character. I think the character is generally underdiscussed in these sources, and that there is still not enough material for a standalone article.
That being said, I originally intended to do more sourcing for the article but got sidetracked with other commitments and forgot. Nonetheless, the sources currently cited in the article already meet the GNG. They do not solely focus on the movies alone; rather, they also discuss the character alongside the films or series within the same sources. Afro 📢Talk! 06:33, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep First, I want to clarify that I’m not a big fan of AfD discussions, and my vote to keep is not based on the fact that I created the article—I want to ensure a fair assessment. The character in question has been covered in over 40 media sources and is recognized as a fictional character for a reason.

I’m not sure what kind of sources are expected beyond those already provided, as they discuss the character while also covering the related films or novels in the same publication. To me, this is a reasonable approach. Not all fictional characters receive standalone coverage like DC and Marvel superheroes do, yet Alex Cross has been a well-established figure for over a decade. Dismissing his notability outright would overlook his long-standing presence in literature and media, for example, ^{[1] [2] [3]} they are similar characters with similar style of publications here o n wikipedia. Afro 📢Talk! 4:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Redirect to Alex Cross (novel series). The article's main notability drawing statements are entirely unsourced, including the entire Legacy section, meaning this article contains heavy WP:OR. The sources provided in this discussion are from dubious sources (FromTheFourThrow seems to be a WP:WORDPRESS published WP:BLOG site, LikeADad.net seems dubious at best, and ForensicPsychologyOnline has no authors attached and seems to be an entirely promotional site). Any other sources in the article are WP:ROUTINE coverage, like announcements of the character's novel series being adapted to TV. There are also several sources that are all plot summary, which does not help with WP:NOTPLOT, including the PsychologyOnline source, which is entirely taking plot summary from a ROUTINE media announcement. I see no evidence of any actual coverage on this character that would constitute the WP:SIGCOV needed for an article, and all comments from those significantly involved with the article have been WP:SOURCESMUSTEXIST arguments without any actual meat to back it up. I would need some actual SIGCOV to be shown to be convinced of this subject meeting notability. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 13:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I'm doing a search since I could swear there have been articles focusing on the character, but I can't seem to find them. Much of the coverage (via Google search) focuses specifically on the film, books, and series, without covering the character in a way that could be seen as showing individual notability. I am finding some sourcing by looking up my old college's database, but since I'm no longer a current student I don't have any way of verifying that the coverage focuses on the character. It does seem promising though. I'm including some of the most promising in the article in a further reading section, but then there are ones like this that are a bit more vague. I am leaning towards it possibly being usable given that it's similar in scope to this. It also deals with black men in film, but the author focuses more on how the character is represented as opposed to purely or predominantly on the film.

Now if sourcing is found, this article will need to be pretty much gutted. It's written in an in-universe style, is largely unsourced, and some of the content seems to be written from a fan perspective. Something I'd recommend adding would be coverage of how people have responded to a white man writing a black character - Patterson has received both praise and scrutiny. That topic could also potentially show independent notability for the character as it does focus on how the character has been written. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found some other potentially usable sources here and here. As with before, these are all paywalled and as such I can't tell how usable they might be. I've also made a couple of tweaks to the page to remove some of the fan POV - I've left the background section alone since that would need some work and also is written to be an in-universe type description of the character, so there's a bit more leeway there. Still, it needs work for the fan POV.

I am leaning towards the character being independently notable and would normally volunteer to re-write the article, but given that the majority of available sourcing is paywalled it makes it very difficult for me to do without going to a public library, which I don't really have the time to do. I also do think there's some validity in the point that the character has been adapted to multiple forms of media (film, TV, comics), so a character page could help collect information on the differences between these adaptations. Although on that note, I think that this could be somewhat resolved by making a franchise page. Currently everything is on the novel series article, which kind of makes it wonky - there's an article on the film series, but I think a franchise page could help tie everything together a bit better. That's not the point of this AfD though, but something I wanted to put out there if anyone was interested. It'd be a big project and is a bit more than I can take on myself right now, admittedly. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't stand the biography section and rewrote it to be at least somewhat more in keeping with Wikipedia's standards. I've removed some of the unsourced content such as his abilities - I mentioned that he was a boxer in the fictional character biography section. The others should be implied with the biography section. If this is kept an abilities section can be rebuilt with proper sourcing. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:18, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed the book list in favor of a prose section. It's redundant to the main article and takes up too much room. Plus it's kind of a given that he will either appear or be mentioned in every volume of his series. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There are several reasons for this. First is that the sourcing I've managed to find (and be able to access) does discuss the character as a character. Of course there's going to be discussion of the books and film, but you're almost never going to be able to find a source that completely divorces the character from its source material. Secondly, this page is a good place to mention both the series and the various depictions of Cross. I'd prefer more sourcing, but I think what I've found so far is good - the paywalled sourcing I've put on the article page (further reading) seems extremely likely to be usable as sourcing to establish independent notability for the character and justify an individual article.

I've also done an overhaul of the article and removed the bulk of promotional prose. It's not a total rewrite but pretty close to it. The article still needs a lot of sourcing to back up various claims. I'm not really comfortable with some of the sourcing - the forensic psychology source has no info on who wrote anything or who runs it. I had to go to the TOU page to learn that it's maintained by XYZ Media. Looking for info on that doesn't bring up much, most of what I'm finding is web optimization and advertising - Google says it's linked to Wiley but I see no evidence of this. The page looks like it was primarily made to link to various colleges that are sponsoring the site to promote their schools. The profiles of various forensic psychologists (one of which is Alex Cross) seems to have been written as an aftersight. It's not super up front about it all being sponsored either, which is why I personally see it as unusable. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 20:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Busseron, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

It's right there in the article: "As early as the 1920s, Busseron was not so much a town and just simply a railroad station." In fact the passage cited, which was published in 1886, reads, " The town contains twenty lots, each 100 feet square. The town now is one only in name, being simply a station on the railroad." There is a rough line of houses but how much does a town need to fail in order to have not been a town? There are some early references to it, both involving incidents with the native Americans in the area, but it's not terribly clear that these involved something other than an army encampment. Mangoe (talk) 01:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 02:25, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: There is some history that predates the railroad here (the line opened in 1854), but its hard to decipher at first glance. So not sure its notable. Here's an 1815 article talking about streets of a town of Busseron being laid out[88]. 1815 would be pretty early in the white settlement of Indiana but perhaps makes sense since the location is so close to Vincennes, Indiana which the French founded in the 1730s. Also, the 1815 Busseron location may well have been farther north, in Sullivan County.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 13:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A. C. Frieden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this previously unreferenced BLP about a writer, and have added three sources. One is the publisher's website, however, so not an independent source. The other two are both reviews in Kirkus. I haven't been able to find three good sources, and don't think he meets WP:GNG or WP:NAUTHOR. I did find this in the Daily Herald through ProQuest, but it reads like a press release from the publisher. Tacyarg (talk) 20:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Senegal, and United States of America. Tacyarg (talk) 20:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Switzerland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Couldn't find anything on Proquest for any of his books. The Daily Herald piece is clearly a press release from the publisher, and the two Kirkus reviews are from the Kirkus Indie program, which means they are paid reviews and therefore not usable for the purposes of WP:NAUTHOR. Didn't find anything else to suggest notability. MCE89 (talk) 04:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this article meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for authors. While the Kirkus reviews may not be considered strong independent sources per WP:NAUTHOR, additional evidence supports the subject’s notability. The author has been featured in multiple crime fiction podcasts, including *Spear-Talk* and *Second Sunday Books*, where he has been interviewed alongside other established thriller writers. Additionally, he has contributed articles to *Thrilleresque Magazine*, an independent literary publication recognized in the crime fiction community.

Furthermore, the author is one of the few Western writers to have visited and written about North Korea, a topic that has been central to two of his published works. His experiences in North Korea have been discussed in both *Spear-Talk* and *Second Sunday Books* podcasts, as well as in his referenced article in *Thrilleresque Magazine*.

I am continuing to search for independent sources, particularly given that the author has spoken on *espionage thriller* panels at *Bouchercon 2024* and *Bouchercon 2022*, one of the most recognized literary events in crime fiction. Given the subject’s multiple published works, ongoing media coverage, and contributions to the crime fiction genre, I request that the article be retained. 2601:241:8E00:87B:8159:B6BD:E466:6C67 (talk) 03:08, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Following my initial response, I have found and added additional independent sources related to the author's latest book, *Midnight in Delhi*, which has received multiple positive reviews in the U.S. and India. Notably, *Best Thriller Books*, one of the leading independent book reviewers in the thriller genre, has reviewed the novel. These new references further reinforce the subject’s ongoing recognition in the crime fiction community. I am continuing to search for more independent coverage to strengthen the article. 2601:241:8E00:87B:8159:B6BD:E466:6C67 (talk) 03:20, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appearances on podcasts and panels, an article that the subject authored, and an alumni interview can't be considered towards notability, as they are not independent sources. These two sources seem to just be publisher blurbs. The review in "Best Thriller Books" is a little closer, but it's an extremely short review on what seems to be a relatively obscure website. I don't think we're close to WP:NAUTHOR or WP:GNG yet. MCE89 (talk) 03:56, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Following my previous response, I have added multiple independent sources confirming the author's participation in major crime fiction literary events. Notably, A.C. Frieden has been a featured panelist at *Bouchercon 2018 (St. Petersburg)*, *Bouchercon 2019 (Dallas)*, and *Bouchercon 2024 (Nashville)*, with an upcoming panel scheduled for *Bouchercon 2025*. These conferences are widely recognized as some of the most prestigious gatherings in the crime fiction genre. Independent references from *CrimeReads*, *Lone Star Literary Life*, and *J.T. Ellison’s official website* confirm his participation, further supporting his standing in the field. These sources are **third-party, reliable, and independent of the subject**, meeting Wikipedia's WP:GNG and WP:NAUTHOR standards. Additionally, I am continuing to search for further independent sources, particularly reviews of Frieden's novels in established media outlets. Given the subject’s multiple published works, confirmed speaking engagements at industry-leading events, and coverage in respected literary publications, I request that the article be retained. 2601:241:8E00:87B:F8CE:427D:F4AB:EDC8 (talk) 19:21, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Garuda ^Talk! 00:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Both nom and MCE89 have provided significant evidence that the subject of this article lacks the widespread independent secondary coverage required by GNG. The article is also contains promotional material which looks like a WP:RESUME. Nearly the entire bibliography is composed of self-authored, self-published, or otherwise primary sources that are disqualified for consideration towards notability.  GuardianH  05:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]