Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

11 September 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< September 10	September 12 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

List of B-type stars

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

Seems redundant to Category:B-type stars, which is much more useful and complete. This list would only make sense if complete and, given that there are lots and lots of B-type stars out there, it would be just too big, unhelpful and hard to navigate. Furthermore, we are not a directory and it still fails WP:LISTN. 21 Andromedae (talk) 13:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. 21 Andromedae (talk) 13:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Dawson Gurley

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

The article on Dawson Gurley should be considered for deletion as it appears to lack notability under Wikipedia's guidelines for biographies of living persons. The subject, while known as a YouTube personality, does not meet the criteria for significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources that provide substantial analysis beyond trivial mentions. Much of the content is based on self-published sources or primary sources, which do not establish the depth of notability required for a standalone Wikipedia article. Without significant coverage from independent, reputable sources, the article does not meet the standards for inclusion and should be deleted. Mjbmr (talk) 12:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, United States of America, Arizona, and Internet. Mjbmr (talk) 12:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: This is decent [1]. The rest are about an impersonator of his that was banned from an arena [2], [3]. Having an "impostor" pretend to be you with coverage in the Washington Post and Huff Post implies you are notable? I'd argue yes. I mean, there are no Oaktree_b impersonators, but this person seems to have several mentions of them in RS, so he's famously famous. Oaktree b (talk) 00:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Meaning if you're famous enough to have people imitate/pretend to be you in order to get stuff, I'd say you're notable enough. Oaktree b (talk) 00:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Basically this person has gotten attention for pulling pranks, and has gotten local TV mentions and some notice in reliable sources. Oaktree b, the way I read it is that he is pretending to be Klay Thompson because he resembles him (probably getting close to a legal line in doing so). Your comment seems to be that someone is impersonating Gurley, but I don't think that's the case. This is a guy pulling a stunt - to me, not notable. Lamona (talk) 04:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mjbmr wants to take back his nomination; see here. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Aware that the nomination has been withdrawn,but with an extant !vote from an established editor I think this needs more time
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 12:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheremshyna (ensemble)

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

This musical ensemble fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG. I cannot find any WP:SIGCOV in independent, secondary, reliable sources. (There appears to be a dance ensemble with the same name, but it likewise has no SIGCOV.) I cannot find any evidence this subject meets any criterion on WP:NMUSIC. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Ukraine, and Canada. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Left-wing coalition (Italy)

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

A very weird incomplete disambiguation page (WP:INCDAB). (1) There is no general/international Left-wing coalition dab page where this could be merged, and I can't find other WP pages listing left-wing coalitions. (2) Maybe there is potential for a WP:BROADCONCEPT article like Left-wing politics in Croatia, but the notability of the topic is unclear: There is no interwiki link (including Italian); List of political parties in Italy mentions "left-wing" once, and List of political coalitions in Italy none. So: Should this page even exist? – sgeureka ^t•c 12:08, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Disambiguations. – sgeureka ^t•c 12:08, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not technically "create" the article, it was created [4] by @Nick.mon: when there was a coalition of left-wing parties in Sicily which eventually became Free and Equal (Italy) and thus redirected there. It wasn't accurate since there are/were other coalitions before and after. I wouldn't mind a WP:BROADCONCEPT article or maybe something like Centre-right coalition (Italy) (the latter would have the problem that multiple coalition compete, in 2018 there were three coalitions) Braganza (talk) 12:21, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Judea Samaria and the Golan – the archaeological survey of 1968

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

Single source hyper-specific archeological study that could be rolled up into greater article. Creater and main contributor was banned for copyright content, so may not be appropriate from that sense as well. Consider redirect to main article on the region, with light summary of the source. Sadads (talk) 12:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Archaeology and Israel. Shellwood (talk) 12:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan Labour Federation

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

Notability issue. Fails WP:GNG Wikibear47 (talk) 11:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 12:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Manhattan

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. None of the links presently in the article are reliable sources. toweli (talk) 11:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Georgia (U.S. state). toweli (talk) 11:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stockly

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

I cannot find sufficient reliable news coverage independent of the topic here, per WP:CORP Loewstisch (talk) 08:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Loewstisch (talk) 08:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because the majority of coverage is comprised of trivial mentions, and it reads as WP:ADS --Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:48, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure it's fair to say the TechCrunch, L'Usine Digitale, and Les Echos articles are trivial mentions; they're all focused on Stockly itself. But I will note that every article from the aforementioned three publications is authored by a journalist specialising in covering startups, per their respective bios, and I put very little faith in that sort of reporting ("Wow! Up-and-coming startup raised $x amount and promises to do $y thing and revolutionise the industry!" is the typical calibre). The Forbes, LSA, and Challenges articles do all appear to be trivial mentions though. GhostOfNoMeme 01:57, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Sahin

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. Refs are most business news than BLP sources. Routine coverage. No indication of significance. scope_creep^Talk 07:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Women, California, Massachusetts, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for bringing this to my attention. Do you mind if I ask for clarification about why it's been nominated for deletion? Is it because many of the references also refer to her company, rather than just her personally? I had assumed (perhaps wrongly) that because she is the founder and CEO of a global HR company which has seen rapid growth post COVID, and the founder of the industry on which its based (employer of record industry which allows companies to easily hire people all over the globe), that her notability would be inherently tied to the company's performance and notability. I'd be grateful for your clarification and guidance. Cheers, Kate. KWriteReturn (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@KWriteReturn: This is a WP:BLP and consensus that is long established states that that person is not the company. Notabilty is not inherited from any other entity and there is nothing here to indicate why this person is notable. Looking at the first seven, in fact the 14 references. These are a mix of routine company news about employment, non-bylined paid-for articles, press-releases, funding, merging, expansion and acquisition news. It is all routine news. There is no WP:SECONDARY coverage to verify per WP:V that she is notable. It states in the WP:BLP policy "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources.". There is nothing here. Nothing. scope_creep^Talk 06:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete, because there are No allegations of notability, nor reliable sources, for this BLP. Look, in 2024, claiming that someone is a CEO and therefore automatically deserves a Wikipedia article, is untenable. Bearian (talk) 03:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mikkel Hagli Mossefinn

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

BLP article about an apparently non-notable 13 year old, written in Norwegian, with the only references to Norwegian Wikipedia articles. Article has already been moved twice to draftspace.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of the Malala River

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

Not independently notable content fork. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 10:48, 11 September 2024 (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/2024 September 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:55, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A google search for the specific terms "Battle of the Malala River" and "Battle of Malala River" returned only one hit - the WP article. No hits on google scholar or JSTOR for these specific terms though a JSTOT search for "Malala River" returned one hit here which similarly reports the event, describing it as a "brief fire- fight" (p 41). Calling this a battle is a wiki construct and a misnomer. The article, Datu Ali has a section The Battle of the Malala River with much more "detail" to the point of being excessive and unencyclopedic. The article is bannered requiring cleanup because it is essay-like. Overwriting the section at Datu Ali (retitled) with the content from Battle of the Malala River would be a step forward - if there is consensus here. I have copied this article's content to User:Cinderella157/sandbox 1 anticipating such a course. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:08, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Datu Ali, as this seems to be unnotable apart for their death. Slatersteven (talk) 11:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Datu Ali; action does not seem notable in its own right. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect Andy Dingley (talk) 11:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of the Central African Republic, Washington, D.C.

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

The one source provided merely confirms who the ambassador is. No third party coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 09:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Central African Republic, and United States of America. LibStar (talk) 09:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus–Saudi Arabia relations

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

Previously deleted under looser notability standards at AfD in 2009. Not every country A and country B combination is notable. Very poorly sourced, no secondary sources at all. Contains wild claims such as "political relations are close due to similarities between the 2 countries on historical, geographical and economical issues." AusLondonder (talk) 09:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Saudi Arabia, and Cyprus. AusLondonder (talk) 09:16, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taiyo Nishida

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played briefly in Singapore and not much else is known about him. Creator is indefinitely blocked. (PS. This is my last AFD today.) Geschichte (talk) 09:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ikuma Osaka

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played 6 minutes in Singapore as well as some amateur leagues in different countries. Geschichte (talk) 08:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, and Austria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plush's Corner railway station

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

Non-notable "railway station" on South Australian railway line that closed in 1956. Surely does not meet, and is incapable of meeting, WP:N. Cabrils (talk) 08:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darrell Castle

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NPOL, WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. Routine coverage, interviews, profiles, election news. No indication of signficance. scope_creep^Talk 08:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Law, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kailash Waghmare

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

Bit-part actor. Fails WP:NACTOR. scope_creep^Talk 08:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Theatre, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Albi Koldashi

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

5 games in Albania’s highest tier, continued for a few years in a lower league. The current source #2 is just a squad listing and not significant. The only other source I could find was this. While that one is decent, I still think he fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 07:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Albania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Regardless of whether it is significant or not, just adding one source is not sufficient. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stiven Puci

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

Short career in Albania’s highest league, 4 minutes for Luftetari, then a loan, then 18 more games. I found very few sources, this is clearly not in-depth, and probably not this one either. Therefore I think he fails WP:GNGand WP:SPORTCRIT. Geschichte (talk) 07:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Albania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete‎. PhilKnight (talk) 08:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abhinav Ankit

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

Speedy tag repeatedly removed by socks so bringing here, clearly fails every flavour of WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 07:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete promotional article Traumnovelle (talk) 07:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete promotional, unreferenced, sock-suspected, Speedy tag removed everytime by the socks. Fails all notability policies i.e. WP:GNG TheProEditor11 (talk) 07:58, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Daffodil International Academy

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

Article doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT and WP:SIGCOV. Affiliation doesn't show notability also. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Bangladesh. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Platform-independent model

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

Tagged uncited over 15 years ago and please see Talk:Platform-independent_model#Is_this_really_encylopedic? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think Platform-specific model could be bundled with this. jlwoodwa (talk) 16:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete incomprehensible and unsourced. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Healthera

AfDs for this article:

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

it does not provide sufficient independent, reliable sources that prove the company's notability according to Wikipedia's guidelines. Loewstisch (talk) 08:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Loewstisch (talk) 08:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, Websites, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montenegro (comics)

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

Could not find any additional coverage that would suggest notability, and I don't think the encyclopedia appearances currently included would be enough on their own. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of Luke Cage and Iron Fist supporting characters. BOZ (talk) 07:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can support this. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can withdraw and accept that as a result if you like since no one else has responded yet. BOZ (talk) 12:55, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sofia Nelson

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

No indication of significance. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 07:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, Politics, Sexuality and gender, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All her notability is related to her emails and work with JD Vance. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ruben Katsobashvili

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

According to the recently published book Terrible Humans by Patrick Alley, a co-founder of the anti-corruption NGO Global Witness, this page is a wholly false biography. The book, in the chapter 'The Gatekeeper', states that it was created as part of a scheme establishing a network of false, or shell, companies designed to enable Dan Gertler and others to evade sanctions imposed by the United States Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control in December 2017 for their role in 'opaque and corrupt mining and oil deals in the Democratic Republic of the Congo'. Katsobashvili is also mentioned on the EN:WP page for Interactive Energy, another Gertler-related company involved in the scheme. Further details available if required.14GTR (talk) 04:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep for failing to assert a valid deletion rationale.

Clearly Global Witness has decided to make an issue of the truth of his biography, and their claims have been reported by others. And no doubt you find their claims and that of their founder credible. But an NGO being unhappy with a Wikipedia article doesn't constitute a deletion rationale.

He does get press coverage (some of which includes the allegations by Global Witness) like [5], [6], [7]. So it seems likely that the article passes WP:GNG (and you certainly haven't made the argument it doesn't).

I'm not trying to defend this guy, or advocating for keeping an article if it's just a bunch of lies. But if you have reliable sources demonstrating that parts of the article are untrue, wouldn't the appropriate thing to be to add those claims to the article? Then we get a full picture rather than just taking an approach that results in Wikipedia containing no information about this person. Oblivy (talk) 05:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I could accept the arguement that Katobashvili warrents a mention in the article on Gertler, in the context of Gertler's response to the US sanctions but beyond that all we have is an individual who, seemingly, agreed for his name and photo to be used by others to avoid those sanctions. According to Terrible Humans he is not a career oil and mining magnate and Global Witness could find no trace of the companies listed on the WP page as having being created by him in the various corporate records they checked. Apologies for the delay in responding.14GTR (talk) 06:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point but I think I've already addressed it. You have an NGO that is rubbishing Wikipedia's article, and nothing else. I not only don't see that's a valid deletion rationale but also think it would set a bad precedent to delete an article just based on someone off-wiki saying it's inaccurate. Oblivy (talk) 10:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that Global Witness are stating that the article, and the false story it relates were created as part of the scheme to avoid sanctions. By portraying Katobashvili as an career oil and mining magnate funding Interactive Energy, it attempts to give credence to that company which was a key part of the sanctions work-around. The three sources you found also, by my reading, make this point.14GTR (talk) 11:55, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And to the extent they do, they cite Global Witness. Oblivy (talk) 12:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Georgia (country), and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abhishek Malhan

AfDs for this article:

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

Runner up of the show and doing lots of music video is not enough for notability. Xegma(talk) 04:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Television, Internet, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He is not only a runner up of a show, but a very popular indian youtuber too. Columbidae5 (talk) 06:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Stay, you have reliable sources The Times India, The Hindustan News, News18, among others, it also has encyclopedic development and maintains relevance in what it does as a video blogger. Alon9393 (talk) 22:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Central Library, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi

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

no non-primary sources found. Sohom (talk) 04:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify it for now, need to add more independent sources. Xegma(talk) 04:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries, Education, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - to the associated educational institution. It's history will still be there in the unlikely event independent sources can be found. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 13:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caidy Nelson

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this amateur soccer player. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 06:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, Philippines, and North Carolina. JTtheOG (talk) 06:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - She's a member of Philippine women's national football team and a public figure. I think there are enough sources to warrant a wikipedia page. I saw pages less notable with way less credibility here. Sources cited are legit and from reliable independent news outlet. Medforlife (talk) 06:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No source in the article covers Nelson directly. JTtheOG (talk) 07:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, far too soon for an article. A child who does sports. Geschichte (talk) 07:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slap of Reality

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

Non-notable band that fails WP:BAND and WP:GNG. I could not find any sources about this band and the only reference listed links to a forum post. cyberdog958^Talk 06:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Florida. cyberdog958^Talk 06:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't meet WP:BAND or WP:GNG. Found home web page, FB page, and other promotional postings, but nothing of substance. - Donald Albury 12:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

VTES 3rd Edition

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

Outside MtG, individual sets of CCGs are almost never notable, and I don't see why this should be an exception. Maybe merge the mention of awards to Vampire: The Eternal Struggle if it is not there and redirect this per WP:ATD-R? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Blair Witch characters

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

Does not meet WP:NLIST. All sources are primary and based on the books. Couldn't find anything on a search that discussed the characters as a group. Conyo14 (talk) 04:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Film, and Lists. Skynxnex (talk) 05:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: a perfectly standard WP: SPLITLIST of characters. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Major League Baseball career double plays as a right fielder leaders

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

Looked at the sources, and besides baseball-reference, there isn't much to justify the list as a group. If this included all double plays, then it might be more notable as a group, as Baseball Almanac covers it. Since it is only the one position, I think WP:NOTSTATS comes into play. Conyo14 (talk) 03:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Baseball, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SALAT: too narrow. Now if it had included only blonds born in January ... Clarityfiend (talk) 06:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rosemary's Baby (franchise)

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

After consideration and researching the article myself, I can not find signifigant coverage of Rosemary's Baby as a franchise with a any serious depth. Despite the large amount of citations found in the lead and the amount of content within the article. MOS:FILMSERIES says series and franchise articles would "benefit from coverage that discusses the series as a whole", but we have only been pulling from individual film/tv/work reception and are lacking in material that discusses the entirety of the work. This is predominantly material repeating information already available on the unique film/TV/novel articles.

Two articles are primarily about the 50th anniversary of the first film. There is little discussion of it as a series or a franchise outside other briefs about the development of the film.
- Woman's World has little discussion other than a sequel was made to the film, a follow-up was made to the first book, and a television series was adapted. But there is no real discussion of the franchise from a critical, analytical, or business matter. The articles does not refer to it as a franchise, series, or anything.
- Mental Floss Similarly, is a list of 13 facts about the first film, some tangentially related to the other material related to either the film or novel.

Articles that praise the first film, and the announcement of a sequel/prequel/remake.
- Collider and The Guardian articles primarily praise the first film, and announce a follow up is being developed. There is little discussion about the whole thing as a series/franchise, while boasting the quality of the first film.
- Screencrush is probably the closest in detail to anything, but barely traces it mentioning the tv sequel and a miniseries version. No critical analysis, no history of the film's production as a series or franchise with just a brief mention of the cast returning or not returning for 1970s tv-entry.

Sources that call it a franchise fail WP:SIGCOV, as they are trivial mentions, that fail to "address the topic directly and in detail."
- Comicbook.com states "The movie successfully launched a titular franchise, which includes a 1976 made-for-TV sequel, an upcoming streaming exclusive prequel (2024), and a television series adaptation." this is the only amount of depth applied and like the Guardian and Collider sources, are presented as press releases for sequels to give them prestige, there is no context to it as a series.
- Sportskeeda seems to fail WP:RSP, and can be seen here: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sportskeeda.

The rest of the article generally rehashes the history of the production of individual items. occasionally peppering in that Rosemary's Baby has been called the greatest [horror] film ever a few times and regurgitates material that is already available in the individual articles for the books, series and novels, and places them side by side with no commentary to why we are comparing them. This goes against WP:UNDUE as we have a lack of "depth of detail, the quantity of text, prominence of placement, the juxtaposition of statements, and the use of imagery. In articles relating to a minority viewpoint, such views may receive more attention and space." In this case, we have barely anything discussing it as a franchise and run with content that is just discussing one film or another and places no information on why we have to know this info or how it relates to each or if it was even important to this group of works. The same goes for the film gross, which lists the first film's gross, then restates it as a "Total" for the series and has no information on how much the novels or TV series, in terms of cost, production or anything. This is just regurgitating information from the first article.

Beyond this, the article presents original research such as an "Official Franchise Logo". At the same time, the logo in question on [on Wikimedia] refers to it as just the films logo, not a series or franchise. From my search, I've only seen it used for the TV adaptation and the original.

On searching books, websites, and the Wikipedia Library, I have found tons of content discussing the novel and first book, but nothing outside spare mentions like the above. I propose that the article be deleted or merged with a legacy section on the first novel and first film respectively for their respective content. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:08, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as a WP:SETINDEX. Discuss renaming on TP. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Not every apparent franchise or film series needs to have its own article, and all of this information is just a compiled WP:CONTENTFORK of the individual articles which can easily be accessed by the appropriate lead mentions, categories, and navbox template for this material. Because this "franchise" lacks significant coverage from reliable sources (and the WP:RECENT upcoming prequel series not really adding much else in addition to a TV movie, 1 feature film, and the 2 novels), there is really nothing this article can add that is not already adequately covered by the corresponding articles themselves. Wikipedia is WP:NOTADIRECTORY. As for the set index idea, I would suggest to WP:Blow it up and start over for that. Trailblazer101 (talk) 08:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moncho Iglesias Míguez

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

Very weak article, with references that do not even offer much confidence. If no other sources are found to support it, it should be deleted. It is not so much a question of whether it contributes or not, but rather that it has a very weak documentary base. Alon9393 (talk) 02:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and Spain. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:27, 11 September 2024 (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/2024 September 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Folley

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

Fails WP:ARTIST and probably WP:GNG as well. The sources that I was able to verify are either insignificant coverage or not independent of the subject. I searched for other sources, but only found the artist's blog, a YouTube video, some mentions on gallery sites, and the usual social media sites. I was not able to located the article "Old Master", so I don't know how much coverage it includes. I also wasn't able to find "David Folley: Portrait of a Painter", but considering that it was published by Zap Art Promotions, I'm guessing it isn't independent and was probably created to accompany an exhibit. Overall, the subject seems to be a successful professional artist with the usual smattering of coverage in local media that you would expect. They don't, however, seem to be notable enough for an encyclopedia article, but I would be happy to hear other opinions. The article about their painting The Descent from the Cross (David Folley) also seems to have questionable notability, but I'll leave that discussion for another day. Nosferattus (talk) 02:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Nosferattus (talk) 02:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Well, someone went to prison for a rather nasty attack on a foreigner in Wales that has the same name as this fellow... That's about all I find for sourcing. No listing in the Getty ULAN [8] either. Sourcing now in the article is purely local in nature, not helping show the notability needed. Oaktree b (talk) 02:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A quick search on ProQuest identifies non-trivial independent newspaper articles, including the "Old Master" coverage referenced above : [9], as well as: [10], [11], [12]. Also Art UK has a profile page: [13]. There is potential for meeting WP:NARTIST here. I've added these new citations to the article. ResonantDis_tortion 23:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the added sources, there is also a book about the artist, and enough on the page to meet GNG and WP:NARTIST. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of WWE Raw on-air personalities

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of WWE Raw on-air personalities

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

Per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling#For weekly wrestling shows, subsections listing every single combination of announce team need to be deleted, there is a consensus on Wikiproject Professional Wrestling that articles such as these are not fit for purpose. They are mostly unreferenced or extremely poorly referenced, and are made up of WP:Fancruft ie trivial information only interesting to a niche amount of readers. They also break the guidelines of WP:NOTDIRECTORY.

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reasons:

Regards, CeltBrowne (talk) 01:30, 11 September 2024 (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/2024 September 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Television, and Wrestling. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Askew Saddlery Company

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

Reviewed during NPP. Only has a single source, and no additional reliable sources were found online. Does not satisfy WP:NCORP or WP:GNG. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 01:05, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets NCORP. Significant coverage: Kansas City Journal (also [14]), Kansas City Times (also [15]), Implement Dealers Bulletin, The Atchison Daily Champion. Was apparently involved in a high-profile labour dispute in the late 1800s. 558 results on newspapers.com alone. 5 pages of results on Google books. There is a paragraph of coverage from 2021 here. C F A 💬 02:39, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability and the sources mentioned above don't provide sufficient in-depth information about the *company*, failing CORPDEPTH. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The company was dismantled in the late 1910s. We can't seriously expect modern-day levels of anti-spam sourcing. I would argue the first two sources I provided do offer significant coverage of the company itself and are entirely independent. There is more than enough secondary coverage to write a solid C-class article with the sources I provided, and, as I mentioned, there is a lot more out there. C F A 💬 14:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Our guidelines provide us with a mechanism to assist in determining whether a company was notable and the criteria are rooted in sourcing.

Your arguments are that on the one hand, we can't expect adequate sourcing from that period of time (over 100 years ago) - but this is the mechanism which the community has decided is best to determine notability. Otherwise it might as well be an opinion where all it takes it that someone says they believe it is notable and therefore deserves an article.

Your better argument is that you've provided two sources that offer "significant coverage" of the *company* itself and are entirely independent. The first source is from the Kansas City Journal, Sept 20 1925. In my opinion, it reads very much like a promo piece, with the company celebrating 60 years in business. The vast majority of the article focuses on the founders. You might argue that back in those days, companies were often or not associated closely with real people (not faceless corporations) and so writing about the illustrious lives, trials and tribulations of the founders was conflated with writing about the company - but we still see this sort of thing today too. Celebrities setting up companies to sell their coffee or fashion accessories and usually the coverage is focused on the celeb and not the company. Not many of those companies meet the criteria for notability either because the sourcing fails GNG/NCORP. But whatever about the merits or otherwise of the first source, none of the other sources meet the criteria. The company gets a mere mention-in-passing in second source in the same publication ("Admits Forgery Attempts").

The Kansas City Times from 7th Nov 1899 concerns the company filing a petition for an injunction, it does not provide any in-depth information about the company, fails CORPDEPTH.

If there are other good sources out there that provide in-depth "Independent Content" about the *company*, I might reconsider my !vote. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further review of the current discussion point between HK and CFA, ideally with some other voices to establish a consensus on that issue.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 01:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No comment on the sources but I don't see NCORP as being intended to apply to companies long defunct. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I had a dig through archive.org and there doesn't seem to be a lot of in-depth coverage from the time. There's half a column about the company as part of the (extremely uncritical) article about founder Frank Askew in the 1901 Encyclopedia of the History of Missouri, and there's a a short front-page article in the Lincoln Star about the company merging with Harpham Bros in 1928. There are otherwise several passing mentions in biographies of people who worked for them - often with a comment that Askew were the largest saddlery business in Kansas City - and many routine reports of court cases, trade union matters and so on. It feels like they may have been a notable concern at the time, but I'd agree that the sourcing is extremely weak by modern standards. Adam Sampson (talk) 13:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Viva Van

AfDs for this article:

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

Article deleted by consensus last month; G4 Speedy contested. Additional sources added by contester still don't appear to meet GNG as they are either results/routine coverage or interviews with the subject. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Music, Wrestling, and California. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Viva Van is currently active with AEW/ROH, the previous discussion was relisted however it was deleted before any additional discussion could take place, I've added an article from the Miami Herald, as well as several Fightful Select, Post Wrestling etc. links which we use on several pages concerning independent wrestlers. I think her role in the CMLL Women's championship match against Willow Nightingale is a good example of notability. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 21:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:59C0:5620:58ED:634F:B3D5:5673 (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Same reasoning as my !vote a month or so ago, just not enough to show notability. Match reports are about all that come up. Oaktree b (talk) 00:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Creator of the article here, my reasoning is similar to that of Thief-River-Faller. She makes recurring appearances in AEW/ROH (even if only as an "enhancement talent"), and has made appearances for both of Mexico's main promotions, AAA (appearing at their main event of the year, Triplemanía, in 2023) and CMLL (the aforementioned women's championship match involving Willow Nightingale), and as a result has been subject of articles from mainstream publications such as the Miami Herald. EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 11:29, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Just last month. a previous AFD closed as Delete so I think the discussion would benefit from a little more time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I've added more sources to the article where she is the primary topic. One source is Pro Wrestling Illustrated, which is a generally reliable source on WikiProject Pro Wrestling's list of sources, as well as an interview conducted by Denise Salcedo. Salcedo is an employee of Wrestling Observer Newsletter and Fightful, both of which are considered reliable sources by the aforementioned list. These new sources, in addition to sources already in the article, help her clear WP:SIGCOV criteria. CeltBrowne (talk) 21:11, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interviews of the subject cannot be used to meet WP:GNG due to not being independent of the subject. Both of the sources you added were interviews with the subject. I'm still not seeing anything in the article which indicates the subject has met GNG in the month since the last article was deleted (which, if this is kept, should be undeleted and attributed to, since I don't think there was much different). ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 21:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As I pointed, my main concern is the sources. Wrestlers need reliable sources focusing on them. Most of the article is just WP:RESULTS, that means, reports about TV shows where she worked, but the report is not about her. We can use Cagematch and create articles for every wrestler on the planet, that's why we need to include sources about the wrestler. For example, AEW section has 5 sources, 4 of them, WP:RESULTS. ROH section has 1 source, which is WP:RESULTS (Her ROH career isn't notable). Impact Wrestling has one source, WP:RESULTS. Almost every match on the Independent Circuit it's WP:RESULTS (I don't get why her work with Hoodslam it's relevant at all). We can't just take matches from famous promotions to create an article. On the other side, it's fine to read articles from Denice or Miami Herald about her. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Denice interview has too little secondary context to base a BLP article off of it, especially so since in this instance it's published on The Sportster which is redlisted at WP:RS/PS#Valnet and specifically listed as unreliable at WP:PW/RS. The PWI interview is literally just the raw interview on YouTube. Even if we count Miami Herald, that's still one source. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 16:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. This article is a moving target as sources are being added and removed during the course of this discussion. Sources that merely mention an appearance in a match and pure interviews are not considered SIGCOV. A source assessment table might help settle the disagreement over the quality of the sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist for more input (hopefully).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 01:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nunzio Engwanda

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

All the sources on Google News I could find are all WP:PRIMARY thus failing WP:SIGCOV for WP:SPORTCRIT Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 00:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Belgium. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 00:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lack of WP:SIGCOV need more sources. Xegma(talk) 04:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have added new reliable sources. --Eden10Hazard (talk) 10:08, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

McHugh Forum

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

Cannot find reliable and in-depth sources. All sources found were either closely associated or were passing mentions in "Tales from the Boston College" books. Roasted (talk) 00:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Roasted (talk) 00:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Boston College Eagles men's ice hockey as this is a plausible redirect, and I'm surprised there's only one mention of it in the entire article for such a storied program; I would suggest a "Venues" section be added to the article there. Nate • (chatter) 01:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ice hockey and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Ragsdale

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

Biography claiming "longest serving" but sources are extremely local, and related to public disclosure. Doesn't have lasting public signficance. Sadads (talk) 00:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Education, and Georgia (U.S. state). Skynxnex (talk) 00:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't think a school superintendent is what's wanted under Political notability. Rest is simply confirming where he works and reads like a regular biography. Interesting tenure, but I don't see this as rising above all others in his position. Oaktree b (talk) 00:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete weakly: I accepted this article through AfC, but I realize now that nearly all other articles on school superintendents have some other notable quality besides being a superintendent. My mistake for missing that all the sources are local newspapers and that this isn't a particularly unique case. As a note the original author of the draft article hasn't edited since 16 August when the article was first created. Recon rabbit 01:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Reconrabbit No worries, I had to do a double triple take on it, before I realized what was going on! This is actually a really good case of where a professional probably wouldn't want their biography on Wikipedia, because they have far more narrative control in the routine public disclosures/look news. Sadads (talk) 11:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Somewhat vapid as to content. Nothing here about what he accomplished, if anything, in his decade as superintendent. Nothing but details of how many times he got hired and re-hired for the same job. — Maile (talk) 02:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

System Technology-i Co, Ltd

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

Article about a company which doesn't seem to meet WP:CORP / WP:SIGCOV. It cites 19 sources but if you look at them, none seem to be independent reliable sources about this company. The first is an article about 100 companies doing exhibits at an event in Malaysia, just a passing mention. References 2-4 are financial reports (first party primary sources). Reference 5 is the company's defunct linkedin, references 7 and 9 are websites of the company's products. References 13 to 19 are directory listings on a business partner's website. The Yahoo article is actually a press release. That leaves only the (deleted) PDFs of articles supposedly from Nikkei Sangyo Shimbun. I can't track down the articles at this time, but with titles like "System Technology-i and Delivering training over iPad device" they sound like more press releases.

Admittedly there's a language barrier, and the company is apparently no longer in business. But none of the sources currently cited are anywhere close to being the kind of coverage we'd need to see to establish notability. Here2rewrite (talk) 00:06, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, Education, Software, and Japan. Skynxnex (talk) 00:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

El Mirador Azul

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

It is a very little-known group in its country and its blog sources give little reliability to the context. Alon9393 (talk) 23:55, 10 September 2024 (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/2024 September 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:06, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry, Visual arts, Organizations, Education, and Puerto Rico. Skynxnex (talk) 00:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, just glancing the first 10 results of google book search ("mirador azul" "puerto rico" surrealist OR surrealista) it is clear the group is well covered in academic literature, appears well notable. --Soman (talk) 11:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ LibStar (talk) 02:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Shanmugam Murugesu

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

Does not meet WP:PERP or WP:SPORTSCRIT. We don't create articles for every criminal executed. LibStar (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Crime, and Singapore. LibStar (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep his execution was massively controversial (as executing someone for carrying 2.2 pounds of marijuana tends to be). Sigcov in several books from a quick search, see [16] [17] [18] all with significant analysis. Likely much more. Lots of later news coverage. Inspired a play. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per above explanation by PARAKANYAA. — Maile (talk) 01:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it seems clear that a WP:BEFORE search would show the continued notability of this gentleman and that PERP#2 is easily met. To those publications with sigcov dentified by @PARAKANYAA I'd add:

Ortmann, Stephan. "The Anti-Death Penalty Movement in Singapore: Structural and Situational Opportunities in an Illiberal Regime." Journal of Contemporary Asia (2024): 1-20.
Chia, Priscilla, et al. "Tracing the history of the anti-death penalty movements in Singapore." A history of human rights society in Singapore. Routledge, 2017. 17-35.

Oblivy (talk) 02:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.