Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

3 October 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

< October 02	October 04 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Rajshahi Cantonment Board School And College

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

The article reliance on promotional content and local news also it does not fulfill WP:GNG. Nxcrypto Message 12:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rajendrapur Cantonment Public School and College

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

The article does not provide substantial independent coverage and depends mainly on promotional content and local news. It fails to satisfy WP:GNG due to a lack of third-party references that demonstrate its significance. Nxcrypto Message 12:16, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lalmonirhat Cantonment Public School And College

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

The article lacks significant independent coverage and relies primarily on promotional material and local news sources. It fails to meet WP:GNG as there is absence of third-party references to substantiate its relevance. Nxcrypto Message 12:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ramu Cantonment Public School and College

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

Article lacks significant independent coverage and relies heavily on primary sources, primarily promotional material and local news. Without substantial third-party references, the article does not meet WP:GNG. Nxcrypto Message 11:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hu Zhean

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

User:Ferdy Xu has been on Wikipedia for about 2 years, and contributions like this are his best. Almost all articles written by Ferdy Xu are nominated for deletion. I think this user either doesn't understand Wikipedia's rules or doesn't want to understand them at all. This user avoids communicating on the talk page, and deletes suggestions from other users on the talk page. And for Hu Zhean article, it fails BLP. Stvbastian (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Badminton, and China. Stvbastian (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fried Water Films and Entertainment

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

insufficient independent sources and coverage, suggesting a lack of notable impact in the film industry Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 10:15, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Companies, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Navsarjan Trust

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

lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 10:14, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Gujarat. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karelian Bobtail

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

Cannot find any independent sigcov. The mentions I can find are so brief and vague I can't even be sure they've not just simply misspelt Kurilian Bobtail. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Russia. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gafur Bahini

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

Article lacks sufficient independent sources to establish notability and relies heavily on a two local disputed references. Its content overlaps with broader articles on the Bangladesh Liberation War and Mukti Bahini, making it potentially redundant. Nxcrypto Message 09:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 09:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I think the article fails WP:GNG. --CometVolcano (talk) 09:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously? This is a notable militia. At, this point, These AfDs does not seem like It's for improvement of Wikipedia and, instead it is for targeting anybody and nominating their pages for deletion every time. I can add way more citations, The page could've just been improved by looking for citations. If you wanna delete all pages I created, Just tell me, I now understand the reason for deleting pages of minor skirmishes, but this is just different. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk)
The user who nominated for deletion, literally deleted sources and then the argument was on relying on two sources, Seriously? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk)
Violation - Some of these AfDs have been decided on votes, and not proper arguments. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk)
Draftify if Needed If this topic does not have enough notability, We Shouldn’t Completely Delete it, We could put into draft. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk)
Delete: After conducting a notability test, I conclude that the article does not meet any notability criteria. The subject of the article does not have significant coverage from multiple independent sources. Tried to search, but unable to find such coverage, and the article fails to meet WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 12:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftification will not help because this is a historical article, and if no coverage is found now, there is little chance it will receive coverage in the future. GrabUp - Talk 12:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benz Circle Flyover

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

Imagine if every flyover in the world had an article in Wikipedia. Lacks WP:N. Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there are sources present. The nomination statement seems to be dismissing the article based on its subject, not the sourcing available Garuda3 (talk) 16:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and also delete Kanakadurga Flyover as well. This is peak WP:MILL. Kinopiko ^talk 03:02, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MILL is an essay and not policy. Garuda3 (talk) 20:39, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is someone's expression of policy. Geschichte (talk) 08:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - could be easily merged into Vijayawada article's transportation section. No need for separate article. RWILD ✉ 02:41, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, delete, merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 09:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to National Highway 16 (India).TheLongTone (talk) 10:48, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why? You need to give some reasoning for your answer or it will be ignored by the closer. Garuda3 (talk) 11:16, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pu Zhongjie

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

Declined prod. Prod was removed with a source that is a 1 line mention of Pu. Created by a single purpose editor. Google news has a mere 2 hits. Would reconsider if significant coverage can be found in Chinese. LibStar (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Medicine, and China. LibStar (talk) 02:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on sources in the article. One is a press release, the others are not sigcov. The article itself has basically zero encyclopedic value, consisting entirely of companies he works at and his net worth. I tried looking for Chinese sources – there are some [1][2][3], but independence is questionable and it all probably doesn't add up to meet the GNG. FWIW, I also think the GNG should be strictly enforced for businesspeople à la NCORP. Toadspike [Talk] 18:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. To paraphrase the line from Hello, Dolly! (film), $380 million doesn’t get you notability, unless you spread it around like manure encouraging little things to grow, and get significant coverage in three or more reliable sources. Other than that, he’s one of thousands of newly minted rich people. Bearian (talk) 19:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes and simply being the 849th richest person in China doesn't guarantee you an article. LibStar (talk) 10:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. "Pu Zhongjie". China Daily. 2012-02-28. Archived from the original on 2024-10-01. Retrieved 2024-10-01.
  The article notes: "Pu Zhongjie, born in 1963, is a doctoral degree holder and has obtained the permanent residence permit of the United States. Dr. Pu founded Lepu Group Co Ltd in 1998 and serves as the chairman of the Board and General Manager. ... Dr. Pu is the director of the Chinese Society of Biotechnology (CSBT), vice president of the Interventional Engineering Committee of CSBT and the member of the Changping CPPCC committee."
2. Li, Yihe 李奕和 (2022-10-31). "乐普系分拆心泰医疗IPO，蒲忠杰难以摆脱"自家生意"，依赖关联交易，增收不增利，上半年纯利下降42%" [The spin-off of Lepu's subsidiary, Xintai Medical, for its IPO sees Pu Zhongjie struggling to break free from "family business" ties, relying on related transactions. While revenue has increased, profits have not, with a 42% decline in net profit in the first half of the year.]. 乐居财经 [Leju Caijing] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-10-01. Retrieved 2024-10-01 – via Sina Corporation.
  The article notes: "从校服到婚纱，蒲忠杰和妻子张月娥不仅是生意场上最得意的合作伙伴，二者还是同窗校友。蒲忠杰毕业于西安交通大学金属材料专业，在校期间结识了同专业的张月娥，此后结成连理。1999年6月，已获博士学位的蒲忠杰在国外求学期间接触了心脏支架研发的工作后，毅然回国，与妻子张月娥创立了乐普医疗。2009年，乐普医疗作为首批28家公司之一，登陆创业板，一举成为A股“心血管第一股”。"
  From Google Translate: "From school uniforms to wedding dresses, Pu Zhongjie and his wife Zhang Yue'e are not only the most proud partners in the business world, but also classmates. Pu Zhongjie graduated from Xi'an Jiaotong University with a degree in metal materials. During his time at school, he met Zhang Yue'e, who was also a student in the same major, and they later got married. In June 1999, after Pu Zhongjie, who had obtained a doctorate degree, came into contact with the research and development of heart stents while studying abroad, he resolutely returned to China and founded Lepu Medical with his wife Zhang Yue'e. In 2009, Lepu Medical was listed on the Growth Enterprise Market as one of the first 28 companies, becoming the "first cardiovascular stock" in the A-share market."
3. "创业板被指为"造富机器" 年产亿万富豪500位" [The ChiNext board is labeled a "wealth creation machine," producing 500 billionaires annually.]. The Beijing News (in Chinese). 2010-10-26. Archived from the original on 2024-10-01. Retrieved 2024-10-01 – via China News Service.
  The article notes: "蒲忠杰 1963年出生。乐普医疗总经理。持股市值：66.40亿元。历任北京钢铁研究总院高级工程师，美国佛罗里达国际大学研究助理，美国WP医疗科技公司技术副总经理。他曾参与设计50余项专利，并发表15篇科研文章。1998年，蒲忠杰创办乐蒲集团。与其他创业板富豪榜相比，蒲忠杰是唯一的非实际控制人富豪，纯属“技术投资”。"
  From Google Translate: "Pu Zhongjie was born in 1963. He is the general manager of Lepu Medical. Shareholding value: 6.64 billion yuan. He served as a senior engineer at the Beijing Iron and Steel Research Institute, a research assistant at Florida International University, and the technical deputy general manager of WP Medical Technology Company in the United States. He has participated in the design of more than 50 patents and published 15 scientific research articles. In 1998, Pu Zhongjie founded Lepu Group. Compared with other GEM rich lists, Pu Zhongjie is the only rich man who is not the actual controller, and is purely a "technical investment"."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Pu Zhongjie (Chinese: 蒲忠杰) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 11:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Santhwanam 2

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

Probable failure of the notability guideline for films, but the more pressing concern is the amount of sockpuppetry this article has attracted. I didn't think it was appropriate to tag this under CSD G5, as a few other editors have worked on this, but at least two socks have edited this, and most of the rest comes from IP addresses that have edited the same articles as the socks and geolocate to the same city, suggesting block evasion. I also have concerns about the sources, many of which look like paid promotion disguised as news coverage, and a quick look for better ones did not reveal anything promising. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, India, and Kerala. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The IPs have removed the redirect three times now despite the three editors who disagreed so I guess here we are. Sad we have to be here over SOCKing. Judging notability outside of the editor conduct, it fails WP:NFILM as there is no significant coverage. Out of the 12 sources on the page, only one could possibly be used. The rest are unreliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES or WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pandian_Stores_2#Adaptations: of which this is an adaptation. Not opposed to Keep at all given the existing coverage. Opposed to deletion. Note: the page was accepted through the AfC process, for what it's worth. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mushy Yank: Could you point to the sources you believe have the most significant coverage so we can better evaluate the subject's suitability under NFILM? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a film but a TV series, so, I don't mind you and other users judging it by NFILM standards, if you wish to do so (that could make sense, actually), but in general it's GNG that applies for TV series (WP:NTV being an essay, as I am sure you know, but just stating it for the record). Among bylined articles in English you have articles like https://www.news.keralatv.in/santhwanam-2-launch-date/ (and 5-6 similar articles by the same media outlet, in English) ; in Malayalam, also bylined, this kind of things (not great journalism) https://malayalam.oneindia.com/entertainment/santhwanam-2-asianet-released-a-new-promo-video-goes-viral-here-is-how-fans-reacted-461819.html https://malayalam.samayam.com/tv/celebrity-news/actress-gopika-anil-says-that-no-one-from-first-part-is-acting-in-the-santhwanam-2/amp_articleshow/110149785.cms seem to show this is popular enough. The content of The Times of India non-bylined articles might be challenged so I won't even mention it (but I suppose you had a look). I had redirected this myself at some point, I think (I seem to remember I did at least!), but that was challenged too, apparently. There are a lot of adaptations of the Tamil (5, 6 ?) original and their mentions are regularly removed from the tables, so for me, navigation-wise, as this seems quite popular and given the basic facts (including popularity) are verifiable with various sources, either R or K are good. Also, a detail, the fact that it's Santhwanam 2 but not a real sequel, as it has different characters, makes a redirect to the Santhwanam not the best option. For me a Keep would help the reader more efficiently but I understand the current coverage is not of extremely high quality, hence the suggested compromise. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:57, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing out that NFILM doesn't apply — that was a silly error on my part! However, the same issue prevents the subject from meeting GNG, and the links you've shared here don't help in that regard, except maybe Samayam Malayalam. Looking at the about pages for OneIndia and Kerala TV shows that they have no editorial team, and the latter seems to be a blog run by one person. I think keeping would be out of reach here, but the target you've mentioned for a possible redirect sounds good to me. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:21, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Boross

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

Doesn't meet WP:CREATIVE with only minor roles in various TV and music. I can't find any sources getting close to discussing him. This is just the latest iteration in attempts to promote him as a speaker going back to 2014 (I've already removed that). SmartSE (talk) 08:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No RS available which cover the topic significantly, to establish notability. Ratekreel (talk) 21:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - the subject is not notable for doing any of his various endeavors, except for Morris Minor and the Majors. I won’t be broken up if it’s outright deleted, but a redirect is a reasonable option. Bearian (talk) 19:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Volte (company)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Lots of paid PR, routine business news. scope_creep^Talk 07:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete to establish the company's notability, as there are no significant independent, reliable sources demonstrating its impact or widespread recognition. Additionally, the content primarily reads as promotional, lacking the necessary depth or critical coverage required. --Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 09:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Couldn't find anything useful unfortunately. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think the coverage is signicant, see The Australian and Forbes. What's more, the articles aren't just promoting it, but suggest it is offering a unique way of doing business. Therefore I'm satisfied that it meets WP:NCORP notability critieria. Spinifex&Sand (talk) 00:01, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Spinifex&Sand, the Forbes article is over 90% quotes from Olivier (or Oliver once, apparently). WP:ORGIND excludes sources with no independent content from contributing to WP:NCORP. Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:18, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Major League Baseball career Wins Above Replacement leaders

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

Delete - I love sabermeterics, don't get me wrong, but WAR is such a multi-layered statistic that I think this list is actually giving the wrong idea and, dare I say, even be misleading to casual fans and curious readers by using overall bWAR as its criteria.

Just a VERY short summary: there are three different kinds of WAR, with three different formulae: fWAR (Fangraphs), WARP (Baseball Prospectus), and bWAR (Baseball Reference). Then that further has three divisions with different formulae for each: pitching WAR, defensive WAR, and offensive WAR.

The list is making it seem as if one WAR is considered better and more reliable when, in reality, bWAR's formulae are debatable, especially with regards to pitchers. E.g. Jim Palmer would fall a 100 positions if you used fWAR here - 68.5 bWAR... 56.6 fWAR. Sandy Koufax would be on this list with 50.8 WAR (54.5 pitching and -3.7 WAR for his terrible hitting) with fWAR compared to his 48.9 bWAR (53.1 pitching and -4.2 hitting). Just two examples to give the disparity. I imagine a few people on the list would not even be on it. Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Baseball. Shellwood (talk) 09:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: passes WP:NLIST having been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. See the following source assessment table for evidence:

Source	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
CBS Sports	We've established that Mays was an elite hitter and an elite defender at a premium position for a longer time than most players can dream. It should come as no surprise, then, that he ranks highly in terms of estimated Wins Above Replacement -- after all, you can make a strong case that he was the most well-rounded player in baseball's history, and they've played the game for a long time. Baseball Reference's calculations, to cite one source, have Mays with the fifth-most WAR of all-time: 1. Babe Ruth, 182.6 2. Walter Johnson, 166.9 3. Cy Young, 163.6 4. Barry Bonds, 162.8 5. Willie Mays, 156.2 It wasn't just that Mays compiled WAR over a long time. He did it with brilliant season after brilliant season. As our Matt Snyder detailed on Tuesday: "A season of 8.0 WAR is generally considered MVP-caliber. Mays had 11 of those, trailing only Ruth and Bonds' 12. No one else has more than nine. If we set the criteria to 9-WAR seasons, Mays was second with nine (Ruth had 10, no one else has more than eight). If we went to 10-WAR seasons, Mays and Rogers Hornsby had six. Ruth had nine. No one else has more than three." Whatever you think about WAR's value, you have to admit that Mays' dominance sure feels right.	✔ Yes
Yahoo Sports	There is absolutely a case to be made that there has never been a baseball player greater than Mays and it starts with Wins Above Replacement, especially once you take into account a few complications related to how it is used to lead the debate. For starters, let's look at the Baseball Reference leaderboard for all-time WAR: 1. Babe Ruth, 182.6 2. Walter Johnson, 166.9 3. Cy Young, 163.6 4. Barry Bonds, 162.8 5. Willie Mays, 156.2 Notice a few things about the guys ahead of Mays? We don't need to dwell on this for too long — you probably already know how much the following statement means to you — but it needs to be said: Willie Mays is the all-time leader in WAR among MLB players who competed in an integrated league and never used steroids. Would Ruth have been as dominant as Mays if he had been born 25 years later and faced the wave of Black talent that hit MLB in the wake of Jackie Robinson? It's impossible to say. But it's not hard to argue that the era in which Mays starred for the Giants was when the league's raw talent level was at its highest, when every young boy in America grew up wanting to be a baseball player and was afforded the opportunity.	✔ Yes
Washington Post	Baseball fans love debates, especially the ones we know will never get settled. Wins Above Replacement is a modern stat with imperfections. But, for today, the All-Time Leaders among everyday players make an interesting top five: 1. Barry Bonds (162.8), who gets a big asterisk from me; 2. Babe Ruth (162.2); 3. Willie Mays (156.4); 4. Ty Cobb (151.4); and Aaron (143.1). When you include WAR from pitching, too, then No. 1 is Ruth (182.6) followed by Walter Johnson (166.9). Close enough for newspaper work. Among active players, the leader is Mike Trout at 86.2. We know how great Trout has been. Of course, Willie Mays wasn’t twice as good. But – so long, Say, Hey – sometimes it seemed that way.	✔ Yes
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}}.

Left guide (talk) 09:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Left guide, oh I know it is, and I agree that its notable, no question about it. WAR is well discussed in baseball coverage since it came into existance and there is an endless list of sources. But notability is not why I nominated the list.

The list has no context of what WAR is, why Baseball Reference WAR is being used rather than Fangraphs WAR and does not differeniate between position player WAR and pitchers WAR which are, indeed, two different things. I just think its misleading. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Omnis Scientia: Thanks for the feedback; since we both undoubtedly agree the topic is notable, it seems that basically everything you describe can be rectified through normal editing and cleanup per WP:Deletion is not cleanup. This can be coordinated at the talk page or WT:MLB, or simply done yourself if you wish. May I ask you to consider withdrawing this nomination? Left guide (talk) 12:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Cooke (musician)

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

Lots of passing mentions for the man and an interview but nothing else. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 07:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 09:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Venomous Concept, the one band for which he has been a consistent long-term member, and for which he is most often mentioned in the music media. Otherwise he is one of those pro working musicians who has filled in with various bands when needed and worked some session and solo projects, but remains little-covered in his own right. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bank of Alwaye

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

lacks sufficient reliable sources to establish the bank's notability and significance in the financial sector Slarticlos (talk) 07:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, and Kerala. Shellwood (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inshorts

AfDs for this article:

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

A paid, lame article Slarticlos (talk) 07:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Software, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kwality Wall's

AfDs for this article:

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

doesn't have enough reliable sources to prove that the brand is significant or notable in the ice cream market Slarticlos (talk) 07:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amara Raja Group

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

Advertising, self-promotion, link to own website, The Economic Times link is broken Slarticlos (talk) 07:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Technology, and Andhra Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Public Health Association

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

lacks enough reliable information showing that it is important or significant Slarticlos (talk) 07:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mazhanoolkkanavu

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

PROD removed with statement "Google/English language websearch is not good for Malayalam culture". If that is the case, why is it that Google Malayalam also yields nothing [4]. Changing the year parameter to today yields an unrelated music video of a similar name. Please find a review or two before keeping this. DareshMohan (talk) 06:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we can be sure this was released, with a solid source, I might support a redirect to List of Malayalam films of 2003 (or to Augustine's filmography?) because the cast is rather notable. But we have only IMDb and the other Db to prove it. Is that enough? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Integrated stove

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

The article doesn't meet the requirements of WP:V and WP:N. Frost 05:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No case has been made why sourcing is insufficient. Cortador (talk) 05:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Claims like "the integrated design reduces gaps and corners" are unverified. Also, note the tone in the article, it's unencyclopedic. Frost 05:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP Cortador (talk) 06:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no usable content in this article. Frost 07:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or maybe a redirect to Stoves. There really isn't anything here that can be used. There are academic sources but they don't really add anything of real value to the article. If you google 集成灶 you'll get stoves. Dr vulpes (Talk) 08:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, probably with Stoves but open to other suggestions. The problem is that the words in English mean different things. It appears that there is a level of consistency in China, but I don't have the ability to read local language sources to determine overall whether it has specific meaning there. But there is certainly use in other parts of the world which mean different things - for example whilst we are told that in China is means several different kitchen appliances in one unit, in other places it might just mean that individual appliances are "built in" to the overall kitchen design. I think at this stage the best option is to merge until it is clear that there is specific meaning shown in the third party sources. JMWt (talk) 10:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that was my problem as well. What I think it means, and this is a guess, is that it's a stove that also has an integrated vent. At least that's what I see when I google "集成灶" and go to images. Dr vulpes (Talk) 17:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Cunard (talk) 11:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CapROS

AfDs for this article:

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

Unreferenced since 2006. No evidence of notability. Despite a comment saying "If ever it is decided that the notability of this topic cannot justify an article, then merge this article with the EROS article instead of deleting it", I don't actually see anything to merge as most of the article is dedicated to describing the concept of capability-based operating systems rather than about this one specifically. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. Shellwood (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dettric Jones

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

Fails WP:NACTOR, previously CSD A7. WP:TOOSOON - wait until Jones becomes notable. Prior versions draftified, WP:DRAFTIFY implies that this might not be unilaterally returned to Draft. Even so I suggest deletion. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 04:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Television. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 04:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify and salt the mainspace : Fails both WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. Jones lacks significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. All of his roles are minor roles both in film and TV series. No significant coverage of him as an actor. This is considered to be WP:TOOSOON. — YoungForever^(talk) 06:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Show (band)

AfDs for this article:

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

No appearance of notability. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Pennsylvania. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ per nom and WP:GNG. Lots of information here, but trying to verify any of it turns up crickets. Article was written by a 1-edit SPA apparently to promote a 2016 tour, and has remained essentialy unchanged ever since—except for adding even more promotional material, this time in support of a new venture involving the band's front men. StonyBrook _babble 12:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After considering Chubbles' comment below, and after adding those sources and others to the article, I am changing my !vote to weak keep per WP:BAND #11, which states Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network. The Pittsburgh City Paper and Post-Gazette mention the band's album 'having gotten some airplay in Europe' and 'was getting play in Western Europe'; perhaps we can give the benefit of the doubt as to whether the station or stations involved were major outlets in Europe—I did understand it to mean the UK and Ireland, so a large enough coverage area is involved. And while we don't exactly have the WP:3REFS necessary to satisfy the letter of the above guideline and WP:NCORP, at the very least we now have the promotional material removed, with the rest of the content backed up by multiple secondary sources. The Woodstock appearance does seem to be important, although I'm not well enough informed about these commemorational concerts. StonyBrook _babble 04:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:51, 19 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!} 04:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The promotional bloat of the article is lamentable, but that's fixable. The City Paper and Post-Gazette sources substantiate the band did international tours and got international radio airplay, which is sufficient to pass WP:MUSIC. Chubbles (talk) 13:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:SUSTAINED and GNG. Public relations editing intentions are also rather conspicuous as mentioned in the original nomination statement. Graywalls (talk) 06:11, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Interested editors may wish to compare the nominated revision with the current revision, which has just been stripped of nearly all of its content. Chubbles (talk) 17:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Visakhapatnam Metro

AfDs for this article:

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

Never actually took implementation stages. Politician dream. WP:TOOSOON. No developments from a very long time. Also this article says no metro to Visakhapatnam.- https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/politics/040821/no-vizag-vijayawada-metro-rail-for-now.html. Thewikizoomer (talk) 05:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of speculations within the article as well. Thewikizoomer (talk) 05:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Andhra Pradesh. Shellwood (talk) 09:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already at AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:50, 19 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!} 04:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete much of this seems to be copied from a promotional brochure. A planned project can be notable but I don’t think we’ve reached that threshold. Mccapra (talk) 11:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep To support the WP:TOOSOON criteria, the user cited an article from 2021. However, recent developments in 2024 indicate that the topic has gained momentum again. It is just that the article has not been updated and lacks supervision in addressing promotional content. [5] [6] 456legend talk 10:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Navaratnalu

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

Looks like a complete advertisement. Complete promotional, appears to be a political advertisement done in favour of a political party and its leader.

Looks like a pamphlet for the political party. Thewikizoomer (talk) 04:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Politics, Economics, and Andhra Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment it documents a notable political initiative in Andhra Pradesh, India, which played a significant role in the 2019 state elections. The program, introduced by the YSR Congress Party, has had substantial media coverage and political impact, making it relevant and notable within the context of regional politics. --Mind-blowing blow (talk) 07:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it is indeed an advertizemant for mr jagan Mohan Reddy 2402:8100:21EF:9051:0:0:3D9D:BAF6 (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Along with these promises, there should be a reality check on what has been accomplished and what has not. It’s important to keep a record of what a government pledges during an election and what it actually delivers after coming into power. I think there should an article for each term. RWILD ✉ 02:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DcVD

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

Article fails WP:GNG, I did WP:BEFORE and couldn't find anything of note about this. There are a few mentions about it in forums but nothing serious or useful. If someone finds sources for this please ping me because it will be seriously impressive if someone does. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Technology. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom, I cannot find notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:18, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Penny Hoarder

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

Non-notable content farm containing primarily sponsored posts and affiliate links. See fine print "Advertiser Disclosure" on each page. History of possible COI editing. No significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability_(web) Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 03:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Websites, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GEMO (Skin Care Device)

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

Fails WP:NCORP. The company website, press releases, and industry award web pages are not sources from which the notability of a product can be determined. —Alalch E. 15:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and China. —Alalch E. 15:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It has considerable popularity in this niche market in China. [7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iuliusnanus (talk • contribs) 20:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Promotional content. As a paid editor, you should be especially discerning of promotional and unusable sources. I presume that you are paid to write articles that will be kept, not deleted. If you cannot distinguish between usable and unusable sources, the articles you create will be deleted, and your clients will not be satisfied. —Alalch E. 21:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on the following source assessment:

Official website.
Extremely promotional news article.
Press release.
Some sort of design description written by this product's makers.
Extremely short description similar to above.
Another non-independent description of the product.

None of these meet the requirements of the GNG. The link added by Iuliusnanus above is sigcov (independence unclear), but one source alone is not enough to demonstrate notability. Toadspike [Talk] 18:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:13, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Donaldson

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2018. Not clear that the subject passes WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 15:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Theatre, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Only the first Google news hit seems decent, but otherwise seems coverage mainly for namesakes. LibStar (talk) 23:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies WP:NACTOR with her stage roles [8], specifically: 1. touring with The Pirates of Penzance as Mabel [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] (multiple reviews at each of these stops). A recording of one of the shows was also released [14], the soundtrack of it won a 1995 ARIA Award. 2. touring with The Mikado as Yum Yum [15] [16]. 3. touring with H.M.S. Pinafore as Josephine [17] (not just the highlighted section) [18] [19] (recording also released). 4. touring with A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum as Philia [20] [21] "Forum Is Light Musical Theatre At Its Very Best", The Canberra Times, 2 April 1999 - Vincent, Jeremy (4 January 1999), "Revival revels in farce, not class", The Australian. She is the prime focus of articles Brown, Phil (23 July 2008), "Back to the start", Brisbane News and Kelly, Patricia (26 June 2004), "Family puts a song in Helen's well-travelled heart", Courier Mail. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please cite the sources (and add the missing noteworthy facts) in the article itself? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Duffbeerforme. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:MUSICBIO.181.197.42.215 (talk) 02:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Duffbeerforme; meets GNG. - SchroCat (talk) 05:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - concurring with Duffbeerforme, Ssilvers and Schrocat. Tim riley talk 11:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HOPE (band)

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

I can find nothing to speak of to support the notability of this band, for which the cited sources seem to be scraping the bottom of some local punk rock scene barrel. BD2412 T 02:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. BD2412 T 02:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maratha Resurrection

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

The article lacks WP:NOTABILITY, with only a single source provided which only briefly mentions the term. There seems to be no significant usage of this term in the scholarly community at all, with close to no scholars using this term. PadFoot (talk) 14:35, 25 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 25. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh. Skynxnex (talk) 15:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It appears there is are scholar and book resources that mentions this event, so it may be supported by WP:RS. (click Scholar/Book link at the top of this AfD). Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:52, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are only two citations in scholar that mention such a term, one deals with paintings of early modern era India, and other deals with Vidarbha cotton, none of them are specialised histories regarding the subject. PadFoot (talk) 16:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure. The first citation is cited incorrectly, never a good sign in an article. It doesn’t link to the first paragraph at all. Google Scholar throws up three publications using the phrase, and they’re all 2023 and 2024… so maybe it’s becoming more popular recently, but it doesn’t seem to be there yet. I’d love to know if there are Indian language sources using the equivalent phrase, which is translated here into English? But I don’t have the language skills to find out. So, on the one hand, the article as written doesn’t establish notability, but there seems to be sources out there which might… means I can’t decide between weak keep and weak delete, but tend towards weak delete unless someone steps in and finds some sources so we can be sure it’s not something the creator came up with himself through synth. Absurdum4242 (talk) 16:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Britannica is okay but per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, secondary sources are preferable. If there’s only one secondary source shown, then for now I am okay with deleting the article, until notability is established. I can be persuaded from my vote if someone provides more sources using this term. Someguywhosbored (talk) 04:37, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (or maybe merge) Notability for the term "Maratha Resurrection" is not an issue, as multiple articles discuss it in the context of Peshwa Madhav Rao, such as this [22]. If the historical facts are accurate, the term does not need specialized historical articles to validate its significance. A phenomenon's name can stand on its own merit, regardless of extensive historical analysis. Therefore, if the information presented is correct, I oppose deleting the article. Notability is notability; it is not solely defined by "specialized scholars." Scholars provide historical analysis, while any historical event can be labeled differently over time without distorting history, as long as the facts remain intact. If the historical facts here are wrong, then delete it. Otherwise-keep. Thanks.

DangalOh (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DangalOh, I think get what you mean to say here. The various battles mentioned in the article are notable, but the "Maratha resurrection" as a single event enveloping all these conflicts into a single one is not supported by many reliable sources. Such a term lacks notability and widespread usage in the scholarly community (see WP:HISTRS). A merger into another suitable article would be alright though. PadFoot (talk) 13:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand it. If the series of events are absolutely unrelated and are being portrayed more like a synthesis, then it's a no. But if those events are related or depict a phenomenon that might not have been specifically termed as something like 'Maratha resurrection' by most of the WP:HISTRS, it might still merit inclusion. As logic suggests, WP:HISTRS is meant to establish or verify history. A term for a series of events (unless the events are entirely unrelated and someone is trying to make them seem connected) can be developed at any point in time. And yes, I do believe a standalone article is a bit too much. But I trust you—you will find a way to not completely remove this and find a good article (maybe the main one) to merge it into without compromising its integrity. The term might gain more traction in the future; maybe then people can discuss a standalone article. Thanks. DangalOh (talk) 15:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom, I don't think there's enough scholarly sources that properly refer to a "Maratha resurrection". The scholar search up bit wasn't really much per Padfoot's explanation. Noorullah (talk) 03:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to have been canvassed here. Noorullah21 Notice. Lightburst (talk) 16:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have added some sources. It is a significant evening. Other Indian kingdoms had thought Maratha empire was weakened a lot after the loss of Battle of Panipat on 1761, but Marathas regained territory up to Delhi in 1771 and Najibababad 1772 battle. That is very much notable. And also the exact term Maratha Resurrection was used in multiple sources. Though Marathas could not occupy up to Peshawar like before the Panipat battle, this was a significant territory away from their capital Poona. Crashed greek (talk) 08:41, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The added source (snippet) only includes a brief mention of the term, without providing any explanations of the term. I'm not sure whether you understand WP:NOTABILITY. A simple scholar search will show that there are close to zero sources that use term "Maratha resurrection", clearly depicting that the term lacks notability in the scholarly community. PadFoot (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge There doesn't seem to be enough context or content for a standalone article, but it seems this could easily be merged into Maratha Empire as a sub-heading in the History section. Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Unless I am missing something these individual talk page notices from the nominator (@PadFoot2008:) look like WP:CANVASSING. Both AirshipJungleman29 and Flemmish_Nietzsche previously !voted delete on one of the nominator's other AfD nominations and Noorullah just looks like someone the nominator knows.

Lightburst (talk) 16:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightburst, sorry, I am new to AfDs, (this one is my first one). I wouldn't notify anyone else. So I can't notify people who often contribute to this field? PadFoot (talk) 01:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PadFoot2008: Always best to allow editors to find these through the projects- this AfD was posted in several. If you reach out to individuals it always has the appearance of bringing a like-minded editor to change consensus. I am sure others can explain better than I can. Also read the link WP:CANVASSING as it is nuanced. Lightburst (talk) 02:40, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightburst, Alright, thank you. PadFoot (talk) 07:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per DangalOh's admission, But if those events are related or depict a phenomenon that might not have been specifically termed as something like 'Maratha resurrection' by most of the WP:HISTRS, it might still merit inclusion... The term might gain more traction in the future; maybe then people can discuss a standalone article. As and when scholars will start using this term, we will swiftly create this article. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:40, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm not persuaded by these keep !votes but it would be best to get a clearer consensus in light of the (good faith, out of inexperience) canvassing here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Natashas Project

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

Article doesn't meet notability per WP:ORG or WP:GNG and my searches have produced no significant coverage per WP:ORGDEPTH Demt1298 (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Dance, Crime, and Organizations. Demt1298 (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Kingdom and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:53, 26 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!} 01:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SouthSouthNorth

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

Fails WP:NORG. No in-depth coverage in independent, reliable sources. C F A 💬 01:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Environment, and South Africa. C F A 💬 01:43, 19 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!} 00:44, 26 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!} 01:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the above. pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ibrahim Agha (Algeria)

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

Article sounds more like a book than a Wikipedia article. Henry (talk) 00:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Royalty and nobility, and Algeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the subject is plainly notable. Some of the article needs to be rewritten and looks to me like a cooyvio anyway, though I can’t get the source to load. Mccapra (talk) 03:47, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "Hussein's reaction" section was translated directly from this page: https://web.archive.org/web/20130612123908/https://www.algerie-ancienne.com/Salon/Galib/8France/01expedit/17staoueli.htm I also checked the "Early life" section but did not find copying there. Other sections may also have copyright violations or close paraphrasing, but it's unlikely the entire article has been copied or translated directly here, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:48, 26 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!} 01:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2019 African Entertainment Awards USA

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

Sensational and routine coverages. Fails the inclusion criteria for events. Best, Reading Beans 00:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am bundling these two here per my nomination statement.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Events, Nigeria, and United States of America. Reading Beans 00:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:20, 26 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!} 01:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vanessa Grellet

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

No significant coverage in secondary, independent sources outside of all the crypto churnalism. Accomplished businesswoman and executive, but there's nothing much of note (awards, research, influence, founding of a company). Mooonswimmer 16:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, France, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 16:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for your feedback.

I am quite surprised by this outcome, all the sources were found on Google, the most important ones in Google News. And I just found a new source on Forbes: https://www.forbes.fr/technologie/etat-des-lieux-des-nft-au-paris-blockchain-week-summit

Vanessa Grellet has appeared in 3 notable French media: La Tribune, BFM Business, and Le Monde Informatique, as well as in the Wall Street Journal and Forbes. She has also contributed to a paper for the World Economic Forum. I thought that these were notable primary and secondary independent sources. Your help would be appreciated in order to improve the article. Crystalcoin (talk) 21:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Forbes source you linked to has only one mention of Vanessa Grellet. Translated to English:

Between pure speculation and truly disruptive technology, NFTs appeal to a wide range of profiles. The “NFT Panel: How NFT funds are taking advantage of an emerging market” conference presented how NFT funds are approaching this market. Renowned panelists Julien Bouteloup, founder Blackpool Finance, James WO, CEO-founder DFG, Drew Austin, Redbeard Ventures and Vanessa Grellet, Coinfound explained their interest in these technologies.

Although it's a generally reliable source when the articles are written by Forbes staff, that is far from significant coverage, which is necessary to demonstrate the notability of a subject. It's a passing mention. It doesn't develop on why Grellet is a renowned panelist. Do you have any sources covering her or her work in-depth? That's what would help demonstrate that she is indeed notable. We'd need at least two or three sources. Mooonswimmer 22:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for your answer. Vanessa Grellet contributed to a World Economic Forum paper in 2021.

I don't think this organization would have invited her if she wasn't a renowned panelist.

https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Digital_Currency_Governance_Consortium_2021.pdf

She has two other interviews in the main economical medias in France: in La Tribune (https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/banques-finance/les-bourses-traditionnelles-vont-s-interesser-aux-crypto-actifs-et-vice-versa-vanessa-grellet-consensys-817978.html) and a video one at the Paris Blockchain Week with BFM TV (https://www.bfmtv.com/economie/replay-emissions/tech-and-co/vanessa-grellet-coinfund-coinfund-est-un-fonds-d-investissement-specialise-dans-le-web3-12-04_VN-202204120691.html), one of the biggest blockchain events in Europe. Those are not PR for sure, I can agree that the one on Le Monde Informatique looks more like a PR (https://www.lemondeinformatique.fr/actualites/lire-aglae-ventures-va-lancer-un-fonds-de-100-meteuro-dedie-au-web3-87642.html).

She is also mentioned in The Wall Street Journal :

https://www.wsj.com/articles/arche-capital-to-raise-100-million-debut-fund-amid-crypto-comeback-b7713428 Crystalcoin (talk) 09:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Source 2 is a RS, but it's an interview with this person where they give advice on financial subjects. Rest of the sourcing is PR items for this or that financial venture. Oaktree b (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Just not enough coverage to show notability. A French Gsearch limited to .fr sites [23] only brings up PR items. There isn't enough to show notability. She's mentioned here [24], but it's only a brief paragraph discussing other things. Oaktree b (talk) 01:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
French wiki article has been tagged for promotion and tagged for notability concerns, but they let it run for a year before discussing deletion (which is, strange, but their house, their rules). Sources in the French article are largely these PR items or similar to those used in the En wiki article. I do find it odd that there are no Fr sources used on the Fr wiki article, about a person from France. Oaktree b (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but what you are saying is not true.

In the French Google search, the first link is her profile on the French government's public investment bank called BPI (Banque Publique d'Investissement): https://big.bpifrance.fr/fr/speaker/65009755-7355-ef11-991a-6045bd954cb8/vanessa-grellet

On page 2, there is also on page an official paper from the French Ministry of Economy in collaboration with the French Tech mentioning Vanessa Grellet: https://www.tresor.economie.gouv.fr/Articles/71361bf0-8d26-443c-9572-5c53955c1aa9/files/564c4897-e4b9-44f1-938a-93d7e3b016f2

Again, why would the French Government ask a non-relevant person to talk about a specific subject? Crystalcoin (talk) 09:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We need sources that talk about her; she is important but you need sourcing. Neither of these is about her, they just confirm she appeared at xyz event. Oaktree b (talk) 12:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your answer, I've found a few reliable sources like Forbes and the Financial Times and I have edited the article. Let me know if you see any other improvement. Crystalcoin (talk) 17:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:51, 3 October 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]
Delete Article is based on 2 sources, 1 of which is primary. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 11:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Added more sources and encyclopedic context. Bilateral relations between two nations should not be considered irrelevant, and without notoriety, the two countries have mutual cooperation agreements, and like all articles of embassies, consulates and diplomatic relations with the exception of a diplomat Ghirmai Ghebremariam, who opened a query of deletion because it does not meet expectations, the other previous ones could have relevance in the future, and if they should be maintained and improved, not redirected or merged, much less eliminated. Alon9393 (talk) 21:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Indefinitely blocked for disruptive behaviour. Geschichte (talk) 05:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DeletePer lack of sigcov, in particular independent sources which discuss this topic directly.181.197.42.150 (talk) 04:01, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This looks a bit like a WP:SOCK of banned Alon9393 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The IP's first edit was to Víctor Roqueme Quiñonez which Alon created, and then the IP suddenly appeared in AFD discussions of pages that Alon had been involved in, those being Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kfir Tsafrir and this discussion. I don't know why the IP gave different opinions in the two AFDs though. Geschichte (talk) 08:50, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The sources in the article come close to showing sigcov, especially for a tiny country like Cyprus. Looking up the “Cyprus chamber forum in Riyadh”, I also found this [25]. Looking up the Saudi stance on the division of Cyprus, I found this (extremely biased) paper [26], which is definitely sigcov and argues that Saudi supports Turkey in the dispute (contradicting this article). On the other hand, this news report [27] suggests that Saudi supports Cyprus, not Turkey. The truth is probably a complicated mess. And this [28] suggests an electrical connection (extremely unlikely to happen, but it’s still coverage).

However, despite the coverage, I am not very confident that this article should be kept, since it has very little content that is both notable/DUE and verifiable. Diplomats meeting each other is usually not important enough for inclusion in an article, even if it generates newswire reports (like source 3). Worse, large parts of the article are made-up fluff (like the Cyprus dispute section). This might be a good case for a TNT, I’m not sure. Toadspike [Talk] 09:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Verkine Karakashian

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Theatre, Armenia, Greece, and Turkey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No refs. If any coverage of this person ever surfaces, it would take exactly 10 minutes to write a better article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There is a book reference in the article. I would suggest to keep the article, unless someone actually provided an assessment of its coverage. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoyfulTentmaker That is not a valid policy based keep vote. WP:SIGCOV requires multiple sources with independent significant coverage, which we generally interpret at AFD is a minimum of three sources. One book source, no matter how in-depth does not meet our notability guidelines.4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I kindly disagree, a single book may indicate existence of more sources. Even without references, deletion nominators are expected to do a good faith WP:BEFORE: to check Google, Google Books, Google Scholar, and Wikipedia Library if possible. AfD is not a place to urge people to fix unreferenced articles. Nomination must come only after there are good indicators that the subject is not notable, regardless of the state of the article; as stated in WP:NEXIST. Sorry for repeating these in multiple nominations of yours, but there are not enough people watching these nominations about niche topics like this one, and I honestly believe it will be a loss for the encyclopedia if these are prematurely deleted. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 21:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CeeGee I think you created the article, pinging just in case you were not notified. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 21:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We need other sources, suggesting that they exist isn't helpful Oaktree b (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoyfulTentmaker You seem to be misinterpreting policy language. WP:SIGCOV requires multiple sources as a non-negotiable criteria for all wikipedia articles. It's a must and its policy. Period. WP:NEXIST requires people voting to keep articles to produce multiple sources at the time of making a keep argument at an AFD. Asserting there are sources through guesswork is not following NEXIST; nor is arguing for keep based on a book you personally have not seen. Providing sources with url links or the names, publication dates, and pages of specific sources that you personally have looked at is following NEXIST. As for me, I looked at several standard opera reference works, including a Russian language music encyclopedia and found nothing on this person. My attempt at BEFORE may not be perfect but please WP:AGF. Best.4meter4 (talk) 00:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you re-read WP:SIGCOV because it doesn't say what you think it does. The immediate subsection doesn't mention the number of sources but a bit further it says "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Multiple sources are not a "must" and the requirement is not "policy" (our notability documents relate to guidance rather than policy). Thincat (talk) 10:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Well, this source mentions this person [29], but that's all I can find. I don't think we have enough sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 23:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b Just a note: during the period she was active, The Ottoman Empire used the Arabic writing system. So search is not trivial. Even modern sources include various different spellings of her name. Trying the modern Turkish spelling Verkine Karakaşyan, I can easily find at least one journal paper. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 00:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I can only see a short segment from the Google Books preview, but the book you linked might have a significant coverage (there are three search hits in separate places of the book). Here is the the second one, page 67: "... Verkine Karakashian read his poem “Freedom” and moved the audience so deeply that the ceremony was repeated for several nights in a row. After this incident, gradually more young girls showed the courage to go onstage and break the ...". Seems there is more before and after this passage, and this itself probably has a citation in the book; so if anyone has access to this book it would be really helpful if you could check. Separately, I added two more sources to the article and found the ISBN number of the book, referenced by CeeGee, who created the article. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The Armenian wiki has some links, but I'm not in a position to say if they're RS or not. Oaktree b (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly not notable Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 17:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 20:22, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The sourcing is improved, now we have 6 references (one thanks to @Oaktree b's Armenian Wikipedia pointer), and hopefully notability concerns are now reduced. Also, I'm curious about the opinions @Basak and @Buidhe, who are experienced editors with contributions related to Ottoman Armenians on the English or the Turkish Wikipedia. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Covered by several additional Turkish sources [30][31] Additional Armenian sources [32][33] The main ref in the Armenian article is the Armenian Soviet Encyclopedia. Whether there were citations at the time of the nomination is irrelevant to AfD. Aintabli (talk) 03:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see that new relevant sources were added since the beginning of this discussion, therefore to me it is clear that the article should be kept. Of course, it’s possible to add more sources and improve the article. For example here, it’is possible to learn what were the important roles she played in her years at Güllü Agop Company and in Benliyan Operet Company: Women in Ottoman theater life — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basak (talk • contribs) 06:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC) --Basak (talk) 06:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:02, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deolane Bezerra

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

Refs fail WP:SIRS. Possibly notable for Operation Integration, but that would mean just WP:BIO1E, so fails WP:BIO. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Law, and Brazil. UtherSRG (talk) 21:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:RECENTISM. There is nothing notable about her, other than being investigated for a crime. Svartner (talk) 00:03, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I only created a stub so others could expand. The original article has 66 sources. It's not just a crime, she has a lot more to add. At least draftify again so I can work it a little more. Web-julio (talk) 03:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would this be your !vote to keep or draftify? Draft space is indeed the right place to work on an article when it is currently lacking enough sources. Please take this knowledge to your future self when working on other drafts. I agree that returning the article to draft is an acceptable alternative to deletion. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:50, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per above discussion. This is a case of WP: BITE. Bearian (talk) 18:57, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep she is clearly notable for more than just her recent legal issues; see pt:Deolane Bezerra. Skyshiftertalk 12:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A really substantial edit went in after the draftify !vote(s) - still draftify? Or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:33, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Bugshan

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

BLP supported by two interviews and a 404 link. No claim of notability. Mccapra (talk) 22:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Saudi Arabia. Mccapra (talk) 22:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft - arabic sources exist. Plus a dead link doesn't mean that it wasn't a working source before Abo Yemen ✉ 05:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi if sources exist you can add them in the next few days without needing to draftify. Mccapra (talk) 08:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh okay i will. Abo Yemen ✉ 12:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The sources don't support notability under WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:12, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we see these Arabic sources, please?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:30, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft as per @Abo Yemen so they can have time to find arabic sources. As it stands now I would vote delete. But I really hope Abo can save this article, let me know if there is anything I can do to help! Dr vulpes (Talk) 06:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]