Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

18 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 17	October 19 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

2024 Afghanistan–Pakistan skirmishes

AfDs for this article:

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

Delete or merge whatever else content on this page to Afghanistan–Pakistan border skirmishes. (It's already mostly covered).

This is just an un-needed fork for a page we already have. Not only that, but this page has heavy content from other groups such as the BLA, or TTP, which are scopes completely irrelevant to this topic alone. This page is named "2024 Afghanistan-Pakistan Skirmishes", but also only covers the March 2024 border Skirmishes, when there has also been skirmishes last month in September, which is included in the Afghanistan–Pakistan border skirmishes page. Noorullah (talk) 23:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Afghanistan and Pakistan. Noorullah (talk) 23:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dickens Hill

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

This is mostly without sources, or sourced to the BBC, which doesn't approach WP:SIGCOV. Most of the article is plot recap which is already covered at the character articles. Jontesta (talk) 15:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Jontesta (talk) 15:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:15, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Whilst it can be argued that the plot is overly detailed, I see no reason to delete this article as it is a significant and length story arc which was a prominent part of the soap during this period. Rillington (talk) 12:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rillington do you have reliable sources showing this impact and notability? These are needed in order to build a separate article upon and verify that this subject is meeting independent guidelines. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 14:38, 18 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!} 23:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High Commission of Pakistan, Malé

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

Diplomatic missions aren’t inherently notable; they need to meet either GNG or NORG, which they fail to do in this case. WP:ATD should be merge or redirect to Maldives–Pakistan relations or List of diplomatic missions of Pakistan — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Maldives, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 18:03, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Maldives–Pakistan relations. Gheus (talk) 21:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of diplomatic missions of Pakistan: Agreed for a redirect as per nom. Wikibear47 (talk) 06:22, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there are two different Redirect target article suggestions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto_Rosario

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Roberto Rosario

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

Why the page should be deleted OXYLYPSE (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not meet the GNG; this individual is not notable. OXYLYPSE (talk) 18:41, 11 October 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 October 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:02, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Puerto Rico. Shellwood (talk) 19:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Arizona, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:15, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mayan (software). The article from The Register is the only WP:RS that supports WP:BIO notability that I can see, and that's not enough by itself. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:52, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for Redirection
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Manchester bus route X22

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

Non-notable bus route with no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The two sources currently in the article are a listing of 15 bus routes with no details, and the timetable from the operator. A BEFORE search finds no additional coverage. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and England. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the same reasons as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greater Manchester bus route 263, equally non notable bus route. Ajf773 (talk) 08:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD"d so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Global Securities Lending

AfDs for this article:

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

Not able to find anything on 2i Media, GSL, Jon Hewson and Mark Latham apart from PR articles Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 16:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Finance. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 16:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:59, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion due to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Securities Lending.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:48, 11 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!} 23:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flow (software)

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

I couldn't find sources to add confirming that this meets WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 19:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Software. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: only the ComputerWorld article meets in-depth coverage. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Regrettably not eligible for soft-deletion due to previous prod/deprod. Relisting for further input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:50, 11 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!} 23:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand College of Business

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

Cannot find any independent secondary coverage to satisfy NCORP. Current refs are not independent or are promotional. Article was created by an SPA. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and New Zealand. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion due to recent de-prodding.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 23:00, 11 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!} 23:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Election stock market

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

There is no need for "Election stock market" to have a standalone article. Most of the material overlaps with broader concepts that are or should be addressed in the existing Prediction market article. It would be more suitable to create an "Election prediction markets" section within that article, while acknowledging the term "election stock market" and some of the prediction markets that have been dubbed as such in the past (UBC Election Stock Market). Any material for a merge is limited, as the article lacks in-line citations and may contain original research, although it does include a list of academic papers that supposely cover the topic. Mooonswimmer 22:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lorna Stucki

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

Completely non-notable singer who had one collab that got to 98 in the charts 34 years ago. Absolutely no mentions of her online or in print that I can find that aren't either a simple link to that one single or a reference to this article. Fails WP:BIO and WP:ENT. CoconutOctopus talk 22:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. CoconutOctopus talk 22:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of antisemitic incidents in the United States

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

Following a disagreement over BLP and NOTNEWS concerns, a large portion of this article was removed and a discussion was had as to what list criteria it should use. After discussing it on the talk page, I do not think this article, or any article attempting to quantify something as broad and vague as "incident" should exist (of which we have at least two others, one about xenophobia in venezuela and a similar one referring to Islamophobic incidents)

The intended scope of the page - any "incident" described as antisemitic by anybody, it seems - is so impossibly broad as to be unencyclopedic. There are tens of thousands of antisemitic incidents in the US that have been reported in the news. Perhaps hundreds of thousands. We cannot list everything ever described as antisemitic by anyone. Further, a lot of the sources used to classify antisemitic incidents have come under fire lately for classifying more disputed ones related to Palestine as antisemitic, when these are not agreed upon. I don't think the NOTNEWS is as big of an issue as the list does not inherently have to abide by that, but the massive scope of this is an issue plus the BLP concerns that come with listing someone's actions here not on the base of any criminal conviction but on the strength of anyone calling it that.

If we limit it to just incidents with articles, as is sometimes done when dealing with articles with particularly broad scopes, we are left with just a handful of incidents, some of which are themselves non notable, the other of which are antisemitic terrorist attacks/shootings, which is notable, but these are listed on another page so reducing it to that would make it just a worse duplicate. The ones that have their own pages, are notable, and are not duplicated on another page number less than five. Hence I would argue delete, but in any case even if not deleted something must be done about the scope. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Discrimination, Judaism, and United States of America. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep encyclopedic list and notable incidents by and large. Meets WP:NLIST, oppose change to scope. Andre🚐 22:01, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not encyclopedic to list every single thing that has ever happened in a country with 300+ million people that someone has called antisemitic. Also BLP concerns. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you have misinterpreted Mr. Andrevan’s point. Steven1991 (talk) 22:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. Only a few of them have a page, so they are not mostly notable incidents. And most are so small scale as to be unencyclopedic. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Read NLIST, it doesn't require that. Andre🚐 22:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Read the guidance on selection criteria for lists.
Selection criteria (also known as inclusion criteria or membership criteria) should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources. - this is not

As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a directory, repository of links, or means of promotion, and should not contain indiscriminate lists, only certain types of lists should be exhaustive.

Criteria for inclusion should factor in encyclopedic and topical relevance, not just verifiable existence.

This current article's scope has more potential entries than is encyclopedic.

PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would see the current article is unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources. If not, please explain why not. editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items emphasis mine. I also don't see how the list is an indiscriminate one, it's limited to incidents described as antisemitic. They're also topically relevant. Andre🚐 22:20, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What organization objectively defines antisemitism? People have many varying definitions of it. An article mostly made up of incidents of NOTNEWS crimes like vandalism and assault is not encyclopedic. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An organization doesn't need to define it, what matters is do the RS describe it that way, absent any meaningful contradiction. NOTNEWS is an altogether different argument than NLIST. For example, we could adopt a time moratorium to avoid RECENTISM and say that new entries need to have at least 14 days before being added. That's not an AFD argument against notability, that's a content discussion at editors' discretion regarding the WP:LISTCRITERIA. Remember that is about WP:V. However, crimes and vandalism and assault aren't always covered in RS and they aren't always described as antisemitic, that is why the criteria here aren't indiscriminate. So long as we apply those criteria rigorously, we are being neither arbitrary nor capricious in doing so, and proportionate with our weight. If the President describes it as antisemitic that's a pretty huge pointer it belongs here. If it's just in the police blotter and not really a national story or discussed in any reasonable depth other than a passing mention, maybe we leave it out. However, we don't definitely need to leave it out. And I'm not sure I fully understand your rationale to delete this article or leave most entries off the list. Andre🚐 22:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get what you're not getting about the problems here. I doubt this will be deleted in any case, but the entire concept of this list is based on a definition with an intersection with an incredibly controversial geopolitical conflict, were this list anywhere close to comprehensive it would be completely unmaintainable, and it is not encyclopedic to list tons of individual briefly covered cases accusing people of committing crimes with no follow up - many of whom were never convicted, so there is a massive BLP issue here. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t get how it is “controversial”. If a Jewish person is assaulted by someone calling them names or being hurled insults consisting of traditional tropes about Jews, or have their properties vandalised with any offensive symbols or slogans, I don’t see how it is tied to any geopolitical conflict, unless there is an assumption that random Jewish persons in the U.S. alike are responsible for it, which shouldn’t be the case. So, I don’t get where the “controversy” comes from. Steven1991 (talk) 23:01, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Steven1991 Is saying Israel should not exist antisemitic? Is a Jew getting assaulted for reasons other than being a Jew antisemitic (this page includes several incidents where the motive is not clear, but someone called it antisemitic)? Is saying Israel does not have a right to a Jewish state antisemitic? Do we use the IHRA definition? If not, what do we use? Is comparing Israel to Nazi Germany antisemitic (IHRA says it is, many self-called human rights activists compare them all the time)? I don't know, but the definition of antisemitism is extremely controversial, yes, see the whole fight we had about the ADL and the definition they use. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLPCRIME here isn't relevant because antisemitism is not equal to being found guilty of a hate crime. The former is more of a "thought crime." Those aren't chargeable. If they were found guilty of a hate crime then that's good proof of the guilt of that view, but BLPCRIME doesn't mean that we can't list an ideological position. BLPCRIME is about crimes. So long as we don't accidentally claim guilt of hate crimes where one didn't occur, antisemitic isn't a crime. Andre🚐 23:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the people here were not found guilty of any crime, hence the BLPCRIME concern. BLP proper is also an issue because antisemitism is a negative allegation so adding someone to this list on the strength of a few breaking news sources and then the topic never gets mentioned again is bad. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The scope of this page requires merely that anyone have called something someone did antisemitic, whether that be a politician, without criminal conviction or widespread agreement. That is bad and has BLP issues. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:20, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn’t appear to be the case if you look at the most recent version, which basically include only the most serious-natured ones. Steven1991 (talk) 23:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. One off assaults are a very common crime. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP as per Mr. Andrevan’s viewpoint. As long as the incidents are historically well known/covered by multiple reliable sources/widely condemned by government agencies and/or NGOs, which would fit the notability test (I am not too familiar), I don’t see how it shouldn’t be there, or we would have crowd a significant amount of content covering those notable incident in related articles, which would in turn cause other issues. Steven1991 (talk) 22:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Steven1991 If we cut this down to historically well known incidents that would be 95% of it gone - most of which is duplicated on another page.

Most of this content should not be on any page. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Steven, if this is a keep make sure you add Keep to the beginning with bold. Andre🚐 22:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak keep~~ - I originally suggested deletion when this was a giant WP:DB, but have changed my mind after thinking about it a bit. The list could be filtered more, and I do wonder about BLP violation.

I think main question to ask is about WP:NLIST: Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; and other guidelines on appropriate stand-alone lists

Antisemitic incidents is definitely notable as a group. WP:SALAT also indicates that the grouping should not be so broad as to be useless. I am still not quite sure about a list of antisemitic incidents, but filtering it to only the United States seems to limit its scope a bit more. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluethricecreamman My question is, when people discuss them as a list or set, do they list them? In which case, do we have any examples of this so we can see what they list? And on what basis will we filter it that will not make it tens of thousands of items long? PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ah well, I have no opinion then, and will strike out my vote for now. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 22:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Rescope - The current scope of the article is too broad as there is no definitive way of deciding what constitutes an "antisemitic incident". The list currently contains a mix of confirmed hate-crimes, incidents disputed due to them involving Israel, & incidents that are assumed antisemitic because it happened to someone Jewish. Many incidents are also just, not notable, only reported on by local news & no follow-up.

If this article is going to continue to exist in some form, I want some sort of objective benchmark for inclusion. I've already given my proposal on the talk page, to only include incidents directly confirmed as hate crimes + historical incidents universally considered antisemitic. Otherwise the list will become an arbitrary compilation of incidents someone says may be antisemitic & will lead to prolonged arguments for/against inclusion.

I would also like to note that the creator of this article, Loksmythe was blocked as a sockpuppet. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 22:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rescoping is needed, unfortunately. I am happy to come up with some suggestions on what incidents should be included within two hours. Steven1991 (talk) 23:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I think there is merit in having some sort of article on antisemitism in the United States but this article is overly broad. It would make more sense to limit it to incidents that are notable enough to merit their own Wikipedia article, otherwise we will end up with a list of thousands of incidents. We don't have List of racist incidents in the United States or List of sexist incidents for similar reasons. Wellington Bay (talk) 23:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regular sound correspondences between Hungarian and other Uralic languages

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

The topics "Regular sound correspondences between Uralic languages" and "Historical phonology of Hungarian" are both notable. However, this topic does not have notability independent of those topics; Hungarian does not play such a critical role in Uralic reconstruction as to justify the existence of this page. Stockhausenfan (talk) 21:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Stockhausenfan (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mission Mars

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

Fails WP:GNG; the article has four sources, three of which are simply pages discussing the challenge published by the league itself, and one of which is a press release inviting people to join. I can't find any significant coverage of this elsewhere. CoconutOctopus talk 21:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Toys and Spaceflight. CoconutOctopus talk 21:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mombao Romato

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

Previously deleted in June at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Datu Mombao Romato. Of the references not marked as retrieved back in June, I have checked references 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, none of which make any mention of Mombao Romato. While not an obvious WP:G4, it doesn't look like this version of the article is adding any WP:SIGCOV compared to the one that was discussed and deleted. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Philippines. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transforms in Digital Signal Processing

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

Contested draftification. Not enough sources given to support GNG as a group, and the article reads more like a class listing various methods and algorithms (each already detailed in their own article) rather than an encyclopedic treatment of integral transforms in signal processing as a whole. A WP:BEFORE brings up more sources (e.g. [1], [2]), but they are all "how-to" books about applying transform algorithms to signal processing, rather than about a specific concept: Wikipedia shouldn't have every conceivable "Using X in Y" article. Likely doesn't work as a list either, being a vaguely defined subset of List of transforms. All in all, discussing this subtopic in Integral transform (and the individual transforms in their respective pages) would likely work better than this hybrid how-to/article. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Mathematics. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Austin City Council District 1

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

Individual city council districts like this aren't usually notable, perhaps a merge to the main article on the Austin City Council would be suitable. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, United States of America, and Texas. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mont Atilakoutse

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

Novel mountain top with no credible source available. Claim that "Atilakoutse" is the highest is inconsistent with a reliable source. https://www.britannica.com/place/Mount-Agou Also, I can't find non-bloggy reference connecting Togo to "Mont Atilakoutse", so redirect/merge would be inappropriate, thus deletion is the only option. Graywalls (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Africa. Graywalls (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Little to no reliable sources could be found. DJ Cane _(he/him) (Talk) 21:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Madelyn Renée

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

Does not meet WP:GNG--the sole cited source barely mentions Renée, in the context of her relationship with Luciano Pavarotti, but there is no mention of her at that article nor is it clear how WP:DUE that would be. Searching online, I was able to find other brief mentions of Renee as Pavarotti's girlfriend (e.g. [3]) and interviews with her (e.g. [4], [5]) but nothing that provides secondary coverage of her life, career, etc. As written, the article is essentially a promotional resume with zero basis in available sources, and apparently with outright COI editing based on an assessment of the page's history. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Massachusetts. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:46, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: to the Pavarotti article. I couldn't find anything substantive myself. Ravenswing 16:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment She also performs as Madelyn Monti and there is some early news as Madelyn Renee Levy. The most substantial coverage I have found is a 2008 piece from the New York Times [[6]] DaffodilOcean (talk) 21:43, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak keep based on the 2008 NY Times article and many other sources I can see online. However, there’s also lot of unflattering information about her out here and there on Google that might implicate BLP. If we were actually neutral in POV, she might want the whole thing removed. Be careful of what you ask for. Bearian (talk) 02:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on the NYT article and other sources, but will require a substantial rewrite to remove WP:PROMOTIONAL sounding material and ensure all material is sourced. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonian mafia

AfDs for this article:

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

I realize that the article was nominated for deletion before. However, significant and in-depth coverage in reliable sources about the so-called "Macedonian mafia" is lacking. The only academic source I've encountered that mentions the Macedonian mafia is Social Change, Gender and Violence: Post-communist and war affected societies. It is true that there are criminal groups in North Macedonia (as well as Macedonian criminals abroad) but I have not seen any sources classify them as part of a broader body, so the whole premise for the article is based on original research. Besides, everything that has been added has been contrary to WP:NOTNEWS. StephenMacky1 (talk) 16:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and North Macedonia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 16:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Virgin Radio Turkey

AfDs for this article:

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

The Turkish article is also uncited. As there are so many radio stations here what makes this one notable? https://businessht.bloomberght.com/piyasalar/haber/1096766-yunanlilar-karnavali-istiyor is not enough I think. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey at the FIFA Confederations Cup

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

As the article has been tagged uncited for years and they only qualified once I doubt this is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 17:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Turkey national football team#FIFA Confederations Cup. The lineups for each match violate WP:NOTSTATS and should not be merged. Geschichte (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect – Per above. Svartner (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Cos ^{(X + Z)} 18:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peace Party (Turkey)

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

Yet another Turkish political party article with no cites at all. I have not found enough to show it to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 17:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Politics, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The party had a short life, but received a lot of media coverage, such as [7]. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 19:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of World War II weapons of Turkey

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

As Turkey hardly participated in WW2 I don’t think this is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 16:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Lists, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will note that OP has not actually made a policy based argument for deletion, that doesn't however mean that they are wrong. I have not been able to locate any independent significant coverage of the topic and there is none on the page, so unless I'm missing something it doesn't meet the requirements of a stand alone list. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the nom's statement does not contain policy-based rationale for deletion, but nevertheless the article might not maintain WP:GNG. I did find this [8], but I'm not too sure if it's reliable or not. Conyo14 (talk) 19:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish American Chamber of Commerce and Industry

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

I found a few refs such as https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkish-american-business-association-names-new-president-117121 but not enough to show notability in my opinion Chidgk1 (talk) 16:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Turkey, and United States of America. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Memphis Villarreal

AfDs for this article:

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

Nothing has changed since the previous AFD. As a part time racer in Nascar's 3rd tier, This is still a very blatant failure of WP:NMOTORSPORT, and no evidence of passing WP:GNG with only a bunch of WP:ROUTINE sources and zero SIGCOV from WP:RELIABLE sources. Once again this is at best several years WP:TOOSOON. IceBergYYC (talk) 16:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 16:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Nothing substantively new since the last AfD, just further press releases and routine coverage from indistry press. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 20:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don Orville

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

Article only cites WP:PRIMARY sources, nothing found via WP:BEFORE. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into List of 3rd Rock from the Sun characters per nom. मल्ल (talk) 19:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2021 Kemerovo Let L-410UVP-E crash

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary in nature since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Russia. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•Delete per nom, non notable run of the mill incident. tragedy doesnt neccestate an article. Lolzer3k 14:28, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I took a quick look for a possible merge or redirect target. Is there any I might have missed? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 14:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alpomish

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

Fails to meet WP:GNG or WP:NGEO. It's a place with landmass with valid coordinate. Existence is not notability. One of those best, biggest, tallest, "-est... in xxx" trivia articles. Graywalls (talk) 14:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment, Geography, Asia, and Uzbekistan. Graywalls (talk) 14:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to suggest both this page and Khazret Sultan be merged to Hisar Range. There aren't substantive reliable sources about either of them – the only coverage is the peakbagger database and the blog post by the climbers. Unless there was independent coverage of the climb or the peaks, I don't think standalone pages are needed. Maybe there's an Uzbek source indicating there's a local interest in this superlative? Reywas92^Talk 15:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Reywas92 There's not even anything to merge. Something that simply exists, and can only be verified by name in the blogosphere of personal websites and blogs shouldn't exist on Wikipedia at all. Like the shed in your property, or a hill on your farm. It shouldn't be merged, because the bloggy source do not meet contents policy per WP:RS Graywalls (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lilit Karapetyan (singer)

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

Does not appear to meet WP:NMUSICIAN based on a before search. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Armenia. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of any notability. Just a single source which appears to be a self penned CV. Fails WP:GNG Velella ^{Velella Talk} 14:31, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The source currently cited in the article is [9] – I don't see any evidence that it is self-published or written by the subject? The publisher describes itself as a nonprofit foundation promoting Armenian folk music and dance. – Joe (talk) 15:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I imagine most available coverage of the subject would be in Armenian. Did your WP:BEFORE search include that, Josh? – Joe (talk) 15:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antik Mahmud

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

No evidence or claim of notability. None of the sources provide the in-depth coverage needed for GNG. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 13:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Television, and Bangladesh. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 13:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Comics and animation, and Internet. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. ~ Deloar Akram (Talk • Contribute) 15:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No notability found for this student. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Twin Towers (Marshall University)

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

Nothing suggest notability. There is a truly remarkable number of articles relating to Marshall University... TheLongTone (talk) 13:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and West Virginia. Shellwood (talk) 14:04, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect >>> List of buildings at Marshall University as very good ATD. Djflem (talk) 17:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of buildings at Marshall University: Very clear target for this article to point to, no independent sources to establish the buildings' notability on the page. Recon rabbit 17:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of buildings at Marshall University Cos ^{(X + Z)} 18:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Redirect to List of buildings at Marshall University. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Keough

AfDs for this article:

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

Clearly WP:NOTINHERITED. Nothing in article suggests nindependant notability. TheLongTone (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Illinois. Shellwood (talk) 14:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Lisa_Marie_Presley#Marriages_and_divorces -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Average Student Nani

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

Fails WP:NFILM. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: multiple bylined reviews cited (does therefore meet WP:NFILM and/or the general requirements for notability). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This appears to have enough significant coverage in reliable sources to keep it.

Mon Bhai (talk) 19:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SenzMate

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

At the moment, it seems like it may be WP:TOOSOON to have an article about this company. The only other coverage I found was this interview I found in Lanka Business Online, which is an interview with little to no independent or secondary content. The Daily FT articles read like press releases, so I am inclined to exclude them based on the precautionary principle expressed in WP:ORGIND. May be a few more years before the requisite coverage exists for us to be able to write a proper article on it. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Computing, and Sri Lanka. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moribund Oblivion

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

Tagged for years as possibly not notable. Turkish article also has no cites Chidgk1 (talk) 12:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing suggests notability, just the usual self-published.TheLongTone (talk) 13:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've added some cites, including an RS stating it's the only Turkish band in the black metal genre to garner international attention. Thus the subject may well meet WP:MUSICBIO. There appear to be several reviews online - particularly in German, in specialist ezines. I will look for more sources when I get time. ResonantDis_tortion 15:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Furthermore, this band also has a profile page in Rock Hard, which is an WP:RSMUSIC, featuring multiple album reviews and articles (even if paywalled). See this link. I've added citations to the article. Other album reviews include [10] and [11]. With these - and the book citation - there's enough coverage to presume notability. ResonantDis_tortion 18:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of mayors of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California

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

This is a list of mayors of a tiny town. The mayors have some hyperlocal significance, but is is part of the walled garden by the same Carmelopaedia editor. Fails WP:NLIST. Some of the people may have inherent notability, but that is as individuals. The intersection with Carmel-by-the-Sea is not encyclopaedic. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and California. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – This list article is a kind of a “shell” housing a list of non-notable mayors of the small tourist town of Carmel, created as part of an effort to include all-things-Carmel on Wikipedia (sometimes called a “walled garden” or a cluster of dozens of promotional articles to booster the town; also known as “Carmelopedia”. The article may have been one of the UPE efforts of the creator. The article fails WP:NLIST criteria per WP guidelines; it is a non-notable subject (perhaps belonging on the Carmel Chamber of Commerce’s website, however it’s apparently not even notable enough for that) and therefore falls into WP:SALAT territory. The references are hyper-local, mainly consisting of the small, weekly tabloid with a low circulation, The Carmel Pine Cone, which of course would report on run-of-the-mill local news like the mayor. Guidelines state that tabloid journalism is not considered significant coverage per WP:SBST. A few items are cited to Arcadia Pub which publishes the Images of America series of picture books marketed to the tourist trade (several discussions questioned the reliability of these books), or to "Valley Press of Santa Cruz" which seems similar to self-publishing. Only six of these mayors are Wiki-notable which is not enough to support this as a notable list. Netherzone (talk) 13:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Satisfies Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists, including Wikipedia:LISTCRITERIA and Wikipedia:CSC. Does not fall [[WP:NLIST since that clearly says:

There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists, although non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations are touched upon in Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not § Wikipedia is not a directory. Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability. Editors are still urged to demonstrate list notability via the grouping itself before creating stand-alone lists.Djflem (talk) 16:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as per the arguments of Netherzone. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Chamoda

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

I searched and it does not seem to be notable in itself. Tagged uncited for years but I have no objection if anyone prefers to merge Chidgk1 (talk) 11:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Sports, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Şifa University

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

I can see from the sources on the Turkish article that it existed. Are universities automatically notable? I guess not as it has been tagged as possibly not notable for years. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Medicine, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - not automatically notable, but any public university is likely to be notable. This one, however, appears to be new, small and private. See [12]. As such, I would have thought it should pass WP:NORG to be notable. I have added it to the companies delsort. At this stage I have no view on whether it is notable or not. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uşşaki

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

Tagged uncited for years but hard to find sources as apparently not the same as https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/U%C5%9F%C5%9Faki_Tarikat%C4%B1 The source on the Turkish article seems like it might be a wiki or somesuch so perhaps not reliable? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Islam, Iraq, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I see various books in English covering this significantly; also two reliable references on the corresponding article in French. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:04, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uzbekistan-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sadettin Dilbilgen

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

Hard to tell if he is notable as there is a writer of the same name, but I suspect not. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Morrison (real estate broker)

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

This is basically an A7 outside of his company Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RETSY, and whatever coverage there is of the company, there is even less of Morrison. Essentially only occasionally namechecked when local news or self promotional coverage mentions RETSY, and apparently nowhere else. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Arizona. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:ADPROMO - non reliable sourcing: Yelp, Realtor.com, LinkedIn, his own company RETSY, app.qwoted.com., among others. — Maile (talk) 14:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RETSY

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

No coverage in IRS outside of local news, the Forbes is self promotion since all of them are from "Forbes Global Properties" and RETSY is a member of, you've guessed it, Forbes Global Properties. Misses the bar so hard it's probably dug through to the other side of the planet by now. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting listsp" for the following topics: Companies and Arizona. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:ADPROMO AS mentioned above, some of the sources, such as "Yelp" are not considered reliable. Also, please see the AFD Chris Morrison (real estate broker) for the same sourcing issues.— Maile (talk) 14:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khaled Al-Saif

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

I don’t think being the father in law of the Crown Prince of Jordan makes a subject notable. Understandably he got some official recognition and publicity around his recent death, but there isn’t enough here for a stand alone bio. Anything we need to know about him is already included in the article about his daughter. Mccapra (talk) 08:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Mccapra (talk) 08:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ajay Kothari

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

Promotional article with no importance. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 08:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India. Thilsebatti (talk) 08:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Nothing suggests notability, just the usual self-published.

Mon Bhai (talk) 18:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welspun USA

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

This article does not meet the notability standards set by Wikipedia's guidelines for companies WP:NCORP and lacks the necessary in-depth coverage WP:CORPDEPTH to be considered notable. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United States of America. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Welspun Living per nom. मल्ल (talk) 19:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

World Defense Show

AfDs for this article:

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

Renominating the article because it has been restored to its original state (after minimal participation in the previous AfD) and has not been modified since the date of its refund (22 September 2024). This circumstance provides ample reason to initiate the deletion of the article once again, using the same argument from the first deletion discussion - "The exhibition fails to meet WP:EVENT. Lacks WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:DIVERSE. Arguably WP:TOOSOON." TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Saudi Arabia. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 07:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Technology. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arsen Safaryan

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

No evidence of any notability. Two YouTube souces and a source that appears to be a self penned CV. Fails WP:GNG Velella ^{Velella Talk} 12:14, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Armenia. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 12:14, 11 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!} 07:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Muldoon

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

Non-notable figure skater; fails WP:NSKATE. None of the rest of the hoohah in this bloated résumé demonstrates any notability either. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and Delaware. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:53, 11 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!} 07:41, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

5th Projekt

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

The more I look into this group, I find that they are local to the Toronto area, self-release their material and only play live in the surrounding area. Can't find any notable charts or awards. Karst (talk) 10:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Karst (talk) 10:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 11:39, 11 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!} 07:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Lawyers' Congress

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

lacks sufficient coverage in reliable, independent sources to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for organizations. Additionally, much of the content is either promotional or lacks verifiable third-party references Moarnighar (talk) 08:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Moarnighar (talk) 08:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:02, 11 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!} 07:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montserrat at the 2015 World Championships in Athletics

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

Article about a territory which sent a single competitor who did not advance to the semi-finals. Duplicates information at 2015 World Championships in Athletics. A single primary source. Created as part of Lugnuts walled-garden of sporting cruft. Not notable. AusLondonder (talk) 07:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sport of athletics, and Caribbean. AusLondonder (talk) 07:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are substantially identical:

Strong delete, preferably alongside 2013 and 2017. Utter cruft failing [[WP:INDISCRIMINATE] created by a user who chased quantity in creating every possible topic under the sun. We need to get rid of many of them. No merge target at Montserrat at the World Athletics Championships, and frankly, that would hardly be encyclopedic either. Lastly, an AFD about Guam from 2018 is in no way, shape or form a valid precedent for a discussion in 2024, given the development of Wikipedia since then. Geschichte (talk) 09:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Geschichte, the referenced Guam AfD is here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guam at the 2015 World Championships in Athletics. It was closed as keep.

I'm inclined to keep these articles as well if a similar amount of sourcing could be found. Should they be deleted, what policy/development changes between 2018 and 2024 could account for that difference?

Also, in cases where only one athlete competed in one event, a clear WP:ATD redirect target would be the event page of the competitor, i.e. this page for 2013, this page for 2015, and this one for 2017. --Habst (talk) 13:52, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No sourcing has been found, so there's no credible argument to keep

A redirect is completely unnecessary. Who is going to be searching "Montserrat at the 2015 World Championships in Athletics" to try and locate a biography? AusLondonder (talk) 10:22, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NLIST, "list articles" like this can be kept without meeting the notability guideline, "Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability". The IAAF entry lists serve as sourcing.

I don't understand the second paragraph. The proposed redirect targets are not biographies, and pageview stats show that these articles do get some traffic. --Habst (talk) 12:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An AFD from 2018 unfortunately doesn't mean anything post-NSPORTS2022. I don't see any value in redirecting. What we do need is to rid ourselves of the perceived need to create every conceiveable combination of XX at the 20XX Y, from a quantity standpoint, without minding quality in the slightest. Geschichte (talk) 19:59, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I agree with you about creating. I'm just curious about what specifically in NSPORTS2022 or any other consensus/policy would affect a list article like this. It seems like these sorts of articles are allowed per policy and AfD precedent. --Habst (talk) 20:10, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As someone who deals with a LOT of sports articles and redirects... I would in the relevant situation. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:31, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Unsourceable cruft. These are not "lists" so NLIST is inapplicable, though even if it was it'd be quite a stretch to claim a list that can only ever contain a single entry serves any informational or navigational purpose whatsoever. JoelleJay (talk) 22:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What makes these cruft @JoelleJay? It's fine if you don't believe they should be a standalone article, but I believe referring to them as cruft is inaccurate. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the conceit of making a standalone for every single country's performance at every single year of a competition, regardless of sourcing or redundancy or real-world importance, is crufty. JoelleJay (talk) 16:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JoelleJay: Crufty isn't how I would describe it, but I do agree that an individual article for each instance of a country at an event is not desirable. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on above discussion. I really tried to find a policy-based reason for deletion for these, but I just don't think there is one. They serve as navigational aids and according to guideline, don't need to demonstrate any particular notability. --Habst (talk) 12:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The idea they're "navigational aids" is absolutely ridiculous. You already "voted" keep above, also. AusLondonder (talk) 12:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Montserrat at the World Athletics Championships: Deleting these is not the appropriate approach in my opinion. Country at [year] World Championships in Athletics is not an unexpected search term, and I don't believe deleting these entirely would benefit Wikipedia. If you look at Category:Nations at the World Athletics Championships, I believe it'd be expected that if someone searched for these pages something would show up, so why do a disservice to our readers and delete them entirely? Hey man im josh (talk) 13:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, if they were deleted, they would be the only red links within the relevant templates (Template:Nations at the 2013 World Championships in Athletics, Template:Nations at the 2015 World Championships in Athletics, and Template:Nations at the 2017 World Championships in Athletics). See Algeria at the World Athletics Championships and Aruba at the World Athletics Championships as examples of what this could/should be if merged. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be ok with merging, but this article doesn't exist yet...? JoelleJay (talk) 00:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Montserrat at the World Athletics Championships per Hey man im josh. This information should be somewhere on Wikipedia. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus here. Please do not suggest a Merge or Redirect unless there is an existing target article or you plan on creating one. A Merge can not be carried out by the closer if the article doesn't exist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This stub article has only one source, and in my opinion, it fails WP:GNG. It's only one sentence long, so I don't see how it can be considered a list. Therefore, it fails WP:NLIST as well. In fact, I don't understand why there should be an article about a tiny nation of less than 5000 people sending one athlete to a championship. DesiMoore (talk) 15:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I created Montserrat at the World Athletics Championships today as a potential merge target. --Habst (talk) 18:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi

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

Being the director general of NITDA isn't enough to demonstrate notability. I've removed some fluff, but I've checked a few more misleading cites, and just concluded this is probably some paid article full of soft mentions, and doesn't pass the strict test for a WP:BLP article. Instead it is a resume. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 07:14, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 12:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : Per nom, you are right. I have gone through all the source and they never talked about him. They were only mentioning what he announced.--Gabriel (……?) 16:01, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge At a critical look at the article, Subject can not stand alone from NITDA. Aside NITDA, what else was their impact and is their any source to confirm the notability?Tesleemah (talk) 08:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From your reason given then that calls for a delete and not a merge. Even Olusegun Obasanjo who commissioned the NITDA, biography was not mentioned there neither anyone who has been appointed as the chairman. Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi can be mentioned in the NITDA article but not this full statement which contains his biography. Gabriel (……?) 10:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Being the "Director General" of the National Information Technology Development Agency of the Nigerian government is enough to meet notability per WP:NPOL. Apart from being a position appointed by the President, he has taken the office twice by different Nigerian presidents. Since NPOL justifies appearance in multiple reliable sources, I can see some coverage in newspapers including bagging a honorary award. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that NPOL specifically says he should not be as it isn't a top level position. Not every appointee (or elected position) automatically passes the bar of WP:BLP/WP:N. I would also note the language in NPOL: "are presumed to be notable" but it doesn't relieve them of the obligation in WP:GNG to have significant coverage in reliable sources. If the position was that important, it would be trivial to find sigcov in WP:RS, but that isn't the case. "Presumption" isn't a guarantee, it just means that it is likely you will find sources. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:59, 11 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!} 07:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per WP:NPOL, not only is the subject the current Director-General of the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), this is a role he has assumed twice under two Presidents. I can also see significant press coverage. B.Korlah (talk) 09:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to claim "significant press coverage" in a deletion discussion, you need to actually provide the links so that other editors (and closer) can determine if the claim is valid, or hyperbole. As for being appointed under two presidents, that has zero to do with notability. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 01:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting again as there is disagreement on whether the subject meets WP:NPOL. It would greatly help the case of editors arguing to Keep if they could bring in sources that would help establish GNG.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Writing Rock Township, Divide County, North Dakota

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

Fails WP:NTOWN. All references I found were either trivial, census/directory information, or referring to the historical site. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 22:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Dakota-related deletion discussions. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 22:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I don't necessarily disagree that WP:NTOWN is failed here, but I do want to mention that there are a plethora of city-related articles that fail this test. Should we delete them all, too? I believe that simply having the historical site there makes it much more notable and worthy of an article than thousands of other places covered on Wikipedia. I should note that I also made this article within the scope of WP Cities, and adhered to their guidelines for US places, where applicable. SouthernDude297 (talk) 22:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, we should be deleting and merging more places like this. The township is not notable because there's a historic site within it; that fact is also at Divide County, North Dakota. Reywas92^Talk 14:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. How is NTOWN violated? It is a populated, officially recognized place. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
None of its sources (or any that I could find) confer notability. As for its current sources, census data and GNIS info does not provide notability. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 23:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NTOWN is a notability guideline which specifically addresses this class of article. While the first reference is not useful, the census most definitely is a reliable source and all that's needed to satisfy NTOWN. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:06, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It establishes reliability, but not notability; which NTOWN explicitly excludes census data from determining. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 13:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NTOWN excludes census tracts from presumed notability for "populated, legally recognized places," not census data. The question would be if North Dakota townships, which are considered a form of local government, meet the definition of a "populated, legally recognized place." —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 14:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:53, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I thought Townships were always kept _pbp 06:11, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find any evidence of its legal recognition that would definitively meet the criteria for the presumption of notability for NTOWN. GNIS says its a civil township, which would likely count as being legally recognized, but GNIS isn't reliable for the declaration of that. Further, I can't find any information from Divide County (which it is located in) explaining its status, beyond what just looks like tax information. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 12:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if this would help, but here it, and the rest of the Divide Co. townships, on a map published by the Divide County government, found here. SouthernDude297 (talk) 14:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It contributes to reliability, but not inherently its notability. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 14:29, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Divide County, North Dakota#Townships. It's not true that townships are always kept. As seen at List of townships in North Dakota, only a small portion of the state's more than 2,500 townships even have articles since there's literally nothing to say about them beyond the census statistic. Only 1,314 of these townships actually have local governments. These are also not the same as towns and NTOWN does not really apply: the entirety of state was historically divided into townships and most including this one are mere artifacts and statistical areas. Reywas92^Talk 14:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Reywas92: Can you point to a previous example of a North Dakota Township being deleted? Have they actually been deleted, or just never created? _pbp 15:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any others specifically in North Dakota, but there's Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/City of La Harpe Township, Allen County, Kansas, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albright Township, Chatham County, North Carolina, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Averasboro Township, Harnett County, North Carolina. I do not believe these townships need their own articles and that the very limited information can be (and already is) covered in the county article and township list. Reywas92^Talk 15:35, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure the applicability of the ones you've listed. The Kansas ones seem to overlap with other entities and the North Carolina ones seem to be legally defunct. This is neither, it just only has three people in it. _pbp 18:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, Wikipedia:OTHER is an argument NOT to make in AFD discussions, so don't really matter. Djflem (talk) 18:46, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The claim was that township articles are always kept. It isn't true, as he showed by these examples. WP:OTHER is irrelevant. Mangoe (talk) 12:30, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:OTHER is relevant whether claiming they are kept or not kept.Djflem (talk) 16:14, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Of the townships which have elected boards, Writing Rock is among [https://www.nd.gov/government/local-government 1,314 of 2500 mentioned above) (see: https://dividecountynd.hosted.civiclive.com/county_government/county_offices/auditor/township_officers and https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t58c04.pdf), so it is defined geographic populated place and political entity, (https://www.ndstudies.gov/gr4/citizenship/part-3-local-government/section-3-township-government) which pass Wikipedia:NPLACE, plus it's home of historic site.Djflem (talk) 16:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
redirect to Divide County, North Dakota#Townships. We do not keep township articles in every state because their importance varies wildly. For example, in North Carolina they were enacted and then almost immediately ignored. I get the impression that in ND they have some function with land use/zoning matters, but they otherwise do not appear to provide any of the other aspects of local government; I could not find anything that outlined what their powers are but I found a state land use form requiring a township officer signature. Be that as it may, I note that the list of officers in the state website gives the names of three people living at the same address which indeed is within the township, and if you believe the census, those same three people are the only people living in the township! It's easy but meaningless to hold an election when the only people who can vote are the officials (and I note that of the other three listed, one lives elsewhere in the county and the second lives in another county; the third has no address provided). I'm also quite dubious that location of the eponymous monument is a point of notability for the township; I had to verify it with a map. The fact that such a large percentage of the townships lack officials indicates their relative lack of importance, and when it comes down to it, it appears all that we can give for them as a rule is geography and populations, which can be served well enough with a map and a table, respectively, in the county article.

As far as ND township articles as a group, it doesn't look as though a great many have been created. One or two users started mass-adding them but did not get far. I found this stale user page for example which for the first county has a reasonable idea for a county table structure. And it contains most of what one would put in an article, so I'm not seeing the need for individual articles. Mangoe (talk) 23:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(North Carolina and North Dakota are not the same state.) Would seem that the name of the Writing Rock monument likely lends its name to the township, and is an important piece of history located within it.Djflem (talk) 17:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I an aware of which state is which, and if you think I confused them, you need to reread the passage. Yes, "it would seem", but that doesn't give the township any notability, and never mind that I have come across no source for that belief. The point is, townships are not necessarily that important in the state scheme of things, and they range from non-existent (Maryland) to vestigial (NC) to possibly more important than counties (NJ). What I'm seeing in ND is that they appear to be of minimal importance, especially given that around half of them have no governance and appear to be just lines on a map. Indeed, the very difficulty of finding out why they exist and what function they serve is an indicator that as individual bodies they are probably no more than minor administrative divisions. Mangoe (talk) 12:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. Seemed you wanted to make a point about NC as being relevant to ND and therefore mentioned it in the 2nd sentence about ND. Djflem (talk) 16:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, As Djflem noted, this community is included as one of the townships with governmental officials and appears to be a political entity. -Samoht27 (talk) 22:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. Regardless of whether a single household is actually being treated as a "political entity", NGEO only provides a rebuttable presumption of notability. That this extant US place has no accessible sources on it beyond directory-level info shows it has no need for a standalone article at this time. JoelleJay (talk) 01:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:58, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GEOLAND as it is a populated, legally recognized place and there is enough in-depth historical information about Writing Rock Township specifically in books such as Stories and Histories of Divide County (1964) – the main section about the township is on p. 454 but there are also other pages discussing various aspects of its history. In addition, as others have mentioned, the township is the location of Writing Rock State Historical Site, which makes it distinctive. Newspapers.com turns up obituaries about people who were born in or homesteaded in Writing Rock Township; a five-year-old girl who was killed by a horse in 1960; a farmer who threatened his neighbors with a rifle and tried to kill himself when approached by police in 1920 – even if none of this is worth mentioning in the article, it demonstrates that it was a real place where people lived (and not "just" a directory listing). (Of those clippings the most interesting one is the Bismarck Tribune article about how the 1928 election returns for Writing Rock Township were not counted by the North Dakota secretary of state because the automobile transporting them was destroyed by fire on its way to Crosby.) Cielquiparle (talk) 05:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinion is divided between Keep and Redirection. Any opinions about the most recently found source?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 11 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, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:49, 18 October 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 keep‎. Withdrawn (non-admin closure) Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shin Dong-geun (disambiguation)

Withdrawn after thinking about it a little more RachelTensions (talk) 06:49, 18 October 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.

Asian Cinemas

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

Fails WP:ORG; does not demonstrate sufficient notability, as it lacks significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Furthermore, the content appears to be largely promotional and fails to adhere to Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and neutrality. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 07:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 10:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Telangana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: significant coverage, in The Hindu, to which one can add https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/asian-cinemas-to-open-nine-more-multiplex-screens-shortly-114041000365_1.html https://telanganatoday.com/allu-arjuns-aaa-cinemas-is-now-open-in-ameerpet-hyderabad https://thesouthfirst.com/entertainment/venkatesh-and-mahesh-babu-join-hands-for-a-new-multiplex-in-hyderabad/ https://www.thehindu.com/features/metroplus/new-cineplexes-come-up-in-hyderabad-suburbs/article6304545.ece etc. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And "promotional", how?? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:31, 4 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!} 07:09, 11 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!} 06:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soccer AM's All-Sports Show

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

Non-notable TV programme. Merge or redirect to Soccer AM. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Football, and United Kingdom. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect Only the first paragraph, and bearing in mind it still needs a citation. Govvy (talk) 09:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. Giant Snowman 12:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Soccer AM, and I have transferred the first part of this article to the Soccer AM article to ensure that the basic information about the programme is not deleted. Rillington (talk) 14:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

United Lutheran Mission Association

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

Fails WP:NORG. Plenty of Ghits from Lutheran congregations affiliated with ULMA, but no significant, reliable, independent coverage found. schetm (talk) 07:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. schetm (talk) 07:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No GNG-qualifying sources in article and none found in a search for this four-congregation micro-denomination. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mick Armstrong

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

This was WP:BLAR'd to Socialist Alternative (Australia)#History, but is not mentioned in the target and the redirect was taken to RFD. The discussion called for it to be listed here. I'm listing this because I closed the RFD; I have not otherwise investigated the subject. asilvering (talk) 02:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Politics, and Australia. asilvering (talk) 02:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd like to point out that Mick Armstrong was mentioned in the target when the redirect was created. He was only removed from that article a minute before the redirect was listed for discussion, for not being mentioned in the target... The removal (and deletion) may turn out to be perfectly justified (I have no insight into and no opinion about this matter), but I find the reason "not mentioned in target" strange when the reason for this is that the user has removed it themselves moments earlier, and then doesn't disclose that they did this. Renerpho (talk) 05:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With the original state of the Socialist Alternative (Australia) article (before the removal of that paragraph, and more so when the redirect was created in 2020), that redirect looks sensible to me. The relevant paragraph was tagged as needing citations since June 2024; and as I said, removing it may be the right choice. But it wasn't an unreasonable target for the redirect based on what it looked like at the time. Renerpho (talk) 06:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think once the material was removed though (as failing WP:V) at that point the redirect being discussed was valid. TarnishedPath^talk 06:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TarnishedPath: Yes, and maybe others will be more lenient. WP:CHALLENGE is clear that you had every right to remove it. That doesn't mean that the timing wasn't unfortunate, and that this wasn't important. I would have preferred either an upfront mention that you removed it ("I have just removed this as failing WP:V, and believe the redirect should be deleted because it's no longer mentioned in the target"), or to leave it and include it in the discussion ("I plan to remove this unsourced information from the target, at which point the subject will no longer be mentioned in the target"). This gives users the opportunity to form an opinion if sources exist (the talk page exists if there's more to know). It's a matter of transparency: When I see an argument like "not mentioned in the target", my impression is that this is because the two are unrelated, and the redirect was unreasonable. I feel misled when important background about the article's history is hidden from me. Renerpho (talk) 07:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll keep that in mind for future reference. TarnishedPath^talk 08:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Thanks for pointing it out in this AfD. -- asilvering (talk) 16:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dar es Salaam School of Journalism

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

Fails WP:NORG and WP:ORGCRIT. I couldn't find multiple reliable sources, which are independent and address the organisation in depth and in detail. TarnishedPath^talk 05:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Education, Schools, Africa, and Tanzania. TarnishedPath^talk 05:50, 4 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!} 07:04, 11 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!} 02:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endor AG

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP with a lack of significant coverage. Created by a blocked user. I would argue the previous AfD of this article was withdrawn in error, as the supposed sources given were of the company's products, not the company itself. Notability cannot be inherited from products a company makes.

Possible ATD target could be Corsair due to the recent merge. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:26, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:26, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:05, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, move to Fanatec as best alternative. The idea that "Notability cannot be inherited from products a company makes" leads to the absurd conclusions at AFD that "List of X products" would be notable but "X" would not, even when the article is substantially about X products. In any case, I maintain that Fanatec as a line of products passes WP:NPRODUCT. ~ A412 ^talk! 17:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, WP:LISTN would imply that a list of products from a company that is not notable, would also be non-notable. In other words, only the individual products by the company Fanatec may be notable. The article Fanatec Forza Motorsport CSR Wheel would be indisputably notable if it was created ([13] [14] [15] [16]). The company - not so much. This notability of products over developers is rather common in video games too. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Fanatec. Endor AG as a parent company is not notable, but Fanatec certainly is (Google News). No, it's not mentioned in the New York Times, but not everything has to be. It's mentioned in PC Gamer, Tom's Guide, various other notable gaming, racing and electronics hardware sources, especially regarding the bankruptcy. </MarkiPoli> <talk /><cont /> 06:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment: Yes, the sources do mention Endor AG a lot but only in the context of "the maker of Fanatec wheels is going bankrupt", and only for this one event. Endor AG, as a business, is not notable </MarkiPoli> <talk /><cont /> 07:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being "mentioned" does not make something pass WP:NCORP. Where is the significant coverage that proves Fanatec is notable and passes the guidelines? ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We don't close AFDs with Move closures which are an editorial decision. If you want this outcome, argue for a Keep and then a page move can be discussed. Also, it really helps the closer if you provide a link to the exact Redirect or Merge target article you are proposing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:31, 11 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!} 02:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ajeet Khurana

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

Having 4 dozen references barely mention one's name when quoted is not a strong argument that there is direct and in depth coverage. More the opposite really. Article has been refbombed into a barren wasteland, it's about time it's put out of its misery. Alpha3031 (t • c) 02:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Cryptocurrency, and India. Alpha3031 (t • c) 02:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agni Poolu (TV series)

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

No significant coverage. The references on the page are 1) about the book and 2) don't even mention the show (FAKEREF?). A WP:BEFORE was unable to locate any significant coverage. Note there is a movie under the same name for those doing a search prior to voting. CNMall41 (talk) 01:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. CNMall41 (talk) 01:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Gemini_TV#Current_broadcasts -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aotearoa People's Network Kaharoa

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

I have found next to nothing online that establishes notability for this organisation. The content could possible be merged to National Library of New Zealand as they seem to be the main drivers of the project. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 02:54, 4 October 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 October 4. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries, Organizations, Internet, and New Zealand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 4 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!} 01:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Useful article with good citations of its own significance nationally in Aotearoa New Zealand public library services. I don’t think merging with the National Library of New Zealand article would be useful to either subject as the latter is mostly a legal deposit library not dealing with networked computer access.Rhagfyr (talk) 07:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails NCORP and GNG. All sources are primary. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if Merge to National Library of New Zealand is deemed inappropriate. WP:USEFUL is insufficient to keep. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 21:10, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merge as an editor is arguing against this outcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dušica Bijelić

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

Article is cited almost entirely to non-independent sources; mainly to theaters employing the subject. Not clear the subject passes WP:SIGCOV. Additionally, the roles currently listed in the article are all insignificant comprimario parts. We need to see better more significant roles, and those roles covered in independent sources, to pass WP:NACTRESS and WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 00:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. 4meter4 (talk) 00:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]