< May 04	May 06 >

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. Nomination Withdrawn (non-admin closure) WikiVirusC^(talk) 23:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Bouzoubaa[edit]

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

Non Notable Politician - No sufficient coverage, Article is only a short paragraph, Fails WP:NPEOPLE. --- PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 22:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 22:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Clearly passes WP:NPOL as a cabinet minister and an MP. Curbon7 (talk) 22:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is Not sufficient Coverage for it to qualify as an article about anything. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 22:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please refer to WP:NEXIST and his ar.wikipedia article. Curbon7 (talk) 22:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, The Link to the ar.wikipedia article just showed up on the main page, with the additional info I can Expand it and get for sources. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 22:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:NPOL as an MP. --Enos733 (talk) 22:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can I undo the nomination?? With the new link to the arabic version of the article, I got more reliable information. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 22:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can undo the nomination by commenting "nomination withdrawn" in the same format as !votes, like how it was done In this AfD. The admins will close the AfD when they see it. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 23:02, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Nomination Withdrawn - More reliable information has been found to expand & improve this article. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Morocco-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:40, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Reverend Mr. Black[edit]

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

No sources or citation showing noability, not sufficient coverage, Fails WP:NM PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 21:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 21:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep That's a classic song, and the article shows it's been recorded by many great musicians. Bkatcher (talk) 22:26, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep One of the most important, and often recorded, American folk songs. It was written by prolific 1960s songwriters Leiber and Stoller. — Maile (talk) 13:55, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete: I suggested that these two forgot they are trying to like it. See WP:ILIKEIT. CastJared (talk) 19:11, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Charted on the Hot 100 and R&B, so should pass WP:NSONG. Cannot only judge notability based on the sources already present on an article. Seacactus 13 (talk) 19:52, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Seacactus, and for reaching #8 on the Billboard chart.Lots of brief mentions in news stories, which do not satisfy nobility, and there's at least one paragraph in a book about the song, which would be a ref supporting notability, in addition to the guideline satisfied by it charting. "From Pentecostal to Episcopalian, by John Guice, 2010, page 22. https://books.google.com/books?id=eml3PDLe7Y4C&pg=PA22&dq=%22The+reverend+mr+black%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjVnsu1k_D-AhVQjIkEHRpfA_g4ChC7BXoECAoQBw Edison (talk) 15:49, 12 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of Razer products[edit]

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

A clear violation of WP:NOTCATALOG. Neither articles nor their associated talk pages are for conducting the business of the topic of the article. Listings to be avoided include, but are not limited to: ... equipment, ... products and services ... Unlike a company like Apple, few of the products that Razer produces are separately notable, which makes the utility of the list for navigation questionable. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:39, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that despite some of the comments, here, some of Razers products do have separate articles, notably the Razer Naga and the Razer Phone, the vast majority do not however. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:37, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, Computing, and Lists. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:39, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It is not a violation of WP:NOTCATALOG. That typically doesn't involve list articles like these, and a lot of Razer products receive notable coverage, just not enough to warrant their own individual articles due to the amount of products Razer releases on a regular basis. Apple on the other hand maybe releases a maximum of 10 products a year, and they're typically revisions to their existing products, not outright new ones. Razer on the other hand does not have any signature product lines that they effectively keep the same name for, except for the Razer Blade, BlackWidow, DeathAdder, and a few others. Having a list of razer products is fine, and this list has existed on the platform for a loooooong time. I'm not saying its useful or popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR and WP:ITSUSEFUL), but there is a genuine reason for this article to exist as it serves as a one-stop shop for a general listing of razer products and serves as an alternative to inidividual articles. The article clearly needs more sources, as it lacks citations, but WP:NOTCATALOG is not a valid reason to delete this. Many articles like this have received AfDs in the past and been kept. Nominating an article for deletion is an outright last resort if an article can't be improved. So on top of saying keep, I honestly severely disagree with the mere creation of this AfD. - Evelyn Marie (leave a message · contributions) 23:10, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence shown within the article that any of these products are independently notable -- or that a list of these products would be notable. :3 F4U (they /it) 00:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Freedom4U I am starting to get severely annoyed with this line of thinking, especially recently when all of a sudden there are lots of AfDs being created for supposed policy violations despite the fact that majority of articles that have AfDs started about them can be fixed and improved - I wanted to get the article's foundation started first before I added citations because that way it would be easier and neater to add citations later, speaking of that, I just added one for the BlackWidow V4 Pro and will add more later. Articles should not be deleted due to a lack of citations if citations can be added. This is not how articles should be handled. At all. Just my two cents. - Evelyn Marie (leave a message · contributions) 03:11, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unsure as to what you're referring to by "lots of AfDs being created", but a page needs to show that it meets meets the basic guidelines outlined at WP:NOTCATALOG and WP:NCORP. The products themselves are not independently notable, so it goes against WP:NOTCATALOG, and the few sources that exist online go against the guidelines of WP:NCORP which specifically outlines that review articles and tech blogs are not significant/reliable/independent sources and generally rely on promotional materials from the company itself.

If there is evidence that the article can be improved with significant, independent, reliable sources, then that's what the point of the AfD is. By all means, bring them up here, and expand the article. As it is right now, the whole article reads like an advertisement/product directory. :3 F4U (they /it) 03:34, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Freedom4U: Razer has received coverage from a significant number of sources, far more than just a few sources, and far more than the number that is in the article right now. Literally every single source about a product (even iPhones) probably leans on at least some from of promotional material about a product from the company who made it. I personally find this line of thinking also a bit out of place. Lots of the products listed in the Mouse and Keyboards sections are products that Razer has not manufactured for years. It serves not as a product directory but as a history of Razer's products, but in table form. Also, The Verge, Ars Technica, etc are very much significant and reliable sources. And TechPowerUp is a significant news site as well in the tech space. They have been for a significant amount of time. I'd argue that they are additionally independent, incl. The Verge and Ars Technica per their editorial policies. So honestly, I disagree with your take on this, and several products in the article have individual wikilinks, e.g. Razer Phone and the Razer Naga. I guarantee you right now that if people wanted to, individual articles could be created for Razer's other product lines like the BlackWidow and DeathAdder keyboard and mouse lines. Yeah not every product is going to be notable but most of Razer's products do get significant media coverage. - Evelyn Marie (leave a message · contributions) 03:51, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, this is what the article looked like before I massively revamped it. A massive, unwieldy list of unorganized stuff. I went (across several hundred edits) to the effort of replacing the entire article with better, less comprehensive tables that only list the basic features and specs, and removed a lot of unnecessary product categories. And on top of that, I removed the chairs section, thereby reinstating your removal, as I do agree with you that chairs are not that notable - anyone can make a gaming chair, and from what I've heard from the web is that Razer's lineup of chairs is not exactly amazing, especially not compared to chairs from companies like Secret Lab. - Evelyn Marie (leave a message · contributions) 03:23, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete None of the items listed have their own Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia has a rule about having an article that just lists every product a company has. Dream Focus 05:14, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Extremely clear WP:INDISCRIMINATE violation. No context for why having a list of all Razer products is important for the lay person. This is not a "supposed" policy violation, but a direct policy violation, and Wikipedia is not responsible for editors ignoring basic policy regardless of how much work is put into an article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Violates WP:LISTN, and all the specs info is borderline WP:NOTDATABASE. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:29, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per WP:NOTCATALOG #6, Listings to be avoided include...products and services. There is no established notability to make an exception here, and the WP:LSC proposed by Evelyn is essentially "we know what going too far is when we see it" which seems insufficient. Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 15:06, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It’s not insufficient? Per Wikipedia policy, articles should not be deleted unless it’s an absolute last resort. I don’t know what’s with all the AfDs lately, but there’s no reason this article can’t be improved to warrant inclusion, including because of the fact that coverage of Razer products by Ars Technica, The Verge, etc should already make this notable. And all razer products can’t have their own individual article pages, it would be impossible to keep track of. This serves as a history, not a database, or Razer products, especially as a lot of the products razer makes aren’t manufactured anymore nor sold, however I do recognize that that increases the necessity to increasing sourcing. There is precedent for these articles to exist, and articles like these have received AfDs like these before from what I know of and have been kept. - Evelyn Marie (leave a message · contributions) 11:48, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS :3 F4U (they /it) 19:58, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm well aware of that policy. My comment stands. - Evelyn Marie (leave a message · contributions) 21:50, 7 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:25, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Lawrence[edit]

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

Relies entirely on promotional contents, trivial mentions or coverage of his company instead of himself. Searches of the name only returned results of a politician with the same name, with not much sources proving his notability nor the claims in this article. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 19:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 19:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: New York and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:28, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete PROMO for a non-notable executive, the ZDNet link is a podcast, that's about the best source there is. Rest are non-useful. Oaktree b (talk) 19:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete per above. CastJared (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not enough reliable sources exist. Pershkoviski (talk) 20:21, 7 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:25, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Bouzoubaa (disambiguation)[edit]

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

Unnecessary disambiguation page per WP:ONEOTHER. Primary topic and the other page has a WP:NCDAB. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:11, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:11, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Morocco-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I actually think it's a speedy deletion candidate but I might be misunderstanding the criterion. In any case, it should be deleted as superfluous (for now) given Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Disambiguation page or hatnotes?. Pichpich (talk) 19:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe G14 is applicable here. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:55, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ONEOTHER and retarget the redirect at Mohammed Bouzoubaa that currently points here to Mohamed Bouzoubaa as a misspelling of the primary topic. Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 16:49, 6 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎ Nomination retracted. (non-admin close) Pichpich (talk) 22:06, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nagar (surname)[edit]

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

I can't find an article about someone with the surname Nagar and I see no indication that it's a remarkably common surname. I therefore see no point in keeping this article unless we want to create a surname page for every name in the phone book. Pichpich (talk) 18:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hey there are lots of article with the surname i have mentioned those names please check i believe this page should not be deleted. Ramahare (talk) 19:18, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – conforms to Wikipedia:Name pages and is no more deserving of deletion than the other 94,892 surname pages in English Wikipedia. All the names link to Wikipedia articles. Hebrides (talk) 20:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: – perusal of the history of the page shows that this AfD was proposed when the page was being incrementally created and no names had yet been added; addition of wiklinked names started a few minutes later. Subsequent edits have rendered the AfD proposal obsolete. — Hebrides (talk) 10:46, 6 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. I see a consensus for a Weak Keep but Keep it is. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Freitas[edit]

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

Marked for multiple issues since 2017 without much improvement. Relies exclusively on promotional content and citation to his work for sources. While there are a number of references and citations to his researches, not enough coverage of himself to pass WP:GNG and WP:NBIO。 Tutwakhamoe (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and United States of America. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Does the Feinman Prize not give notability for wikipedia? I'm unsure. It does need further sourcing however. Oaktree b (talk) 19:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. We have three different things that all point to notability, but each only weakly: (1) The Feynman prize, (2) Well-cited publications [1], but in a high-citation field, and (3) book reviews, one of Kinematic Self-Replicating Machines already in the article, and another of Nanomedicine, Volume 1, doi:10.1017/S0263574700212824. On the negative side, he appears to be much more of a futurist than a scholar, so these notability criteria aimed at scholarly work do not fit him very well. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Seems to be considered something of a pioneer in nanotechnology based on this write-up which states he wrote "the first book-length technical discussion of the potential medical applications..." and has published lots of peer-reviewed papers and 4 books - according to this source. His "expert" opinion is referenced in some articles, i.e. here^[1] and here^[2].--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 01:51, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Scientists in business or independent scholars are more difficult to rate than academics on the tenure track. I lean to a keep based on the above discussion. Bearian (talk) 17:39, 12 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Odai Eid[edit]

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

No evidence of passing WP:GNG found. The best that I could find was Kooora, a basic transfer announcement based on a Facebook press release from a club. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Syria. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 15:15, 7 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. Clear consensus to keep the article like the outcome of the last RFD. Participants disagreed with the nominator and think that the subject does meet WP:GNG. (non-admin closure) - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 00:44, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made A Great Point[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/The worst person you know

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

Non-notable, not enough secondary sources on the topic. RteeeeKed 💬📖 16:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. RteeeeKed 💬📖 16:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep This article was nominated for deletion last year and not a single participant in the discusison voted for deletion. This article has multiple independent, reliable and secondary sources with significant lasting coverage, it meets the WP:GNG. There is no basis in Wikipedia policy for the deletion of this article. It even got a new example in Vox two months ago, which I just added to the article. PhotographyEdits (talk) 19:03, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's got links for articles in the Guardian and Slate, seems ok Oaktree b (talk) 19:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Clickhole This seems like something worth mentioning on the main Clickhole article, but I don't see how it justifies the current paragraph stub. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:13, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, sure I guess. There are sources on this article, but not enough to justify an entire article on the subject. A sentence or two on the Clickhole article would be fine. RteeeeKed 💬📖 21:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RteeeeKed: On what basis do you think it does not justify an article? The WP:GNG states quite simple that multiple sources are needed. There are at least 2 which suffice the requirement of being reliable, independent, having in-depth coverage and being secondary. On another note, merging into Clickhole would mean the image gets removed because it is no longer allowed if that is not the main subject. Also, I have extended the article a bit by writing about the search for him by the Slate journalist. PhotographyEdits (talk) 17:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at WP:NFCC, and I don't see a reason why we can't have the image on Clickhole. And taking a look at WP:MERGETEST, the answer to both questions is no, so a merge is acceptable. RteeeeKed 💬📖 18:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm indeed, I seem to be mistaken with regard to WP:NFCC. But the fact that a merge is allowed does not mean we should pursue one. PhotographyEdits (talk) 18:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have another reason why we can't merge? RteeeeKed 💬📖 22:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Merged information is notoriously hard to Google. This page got over 13000 pageviews last month, so there is clearly interest in it. However, in case we merge it into the history section of ClickHole, it will be much harder to find and is most likely predominantly going to be read by people who are interested in reading about the history of ClickHole. The people who were looking for this will probably go elsewhere (such as the sources used here), but individual sources aren't as comprehensive as the Wikipedia article that aggregrates mutliple of them. It's in the best interest of the WP:READER to keep it as a separate page. PhotographyEdits (talk) 05:17, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for reasons noted above (previous discussion, sources, google-ability). Also, I added a bit more about the image as a standalone meme and commentary on the article. Wracking ^💬 05:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wracking Thanks for your contributions! PhotographyEdits (talk) 05:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per last year's AfD. There's in-depth coverage in The Guardian and Slate, as well as frequent references in other media, e.g. Politico, Rolling Stone, and Vulture. Endwise (talk) 13:12, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian isn't in-depth coverage of the actual article, though, the coverage is primarily about the person who is the subject of the photo. There is essentially no discussion about the clickhole article. Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:32, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per everything stated above.★Trekker (talk) 00:11, 12 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Dale (surf musician)[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a musician, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. The only notability claim really attempted here is his famous father, but notability is not inherited, so he isn't entitled to have an article on that basis in and of itself -- otherwise, this is just "musician who exists", making no claim that he would pass any criterion listed in NMUSIC.
And the article is referenced principally to primary sources and blogs that are not support for notability at all, while the few genuinely reliable sources here are not about Jimmy Dale in any substantive sense, but all just briefly namecheck Jimmy's existence in the process of being mainly about Dick -- so it can't be claimed that he would pass WP:GNG in lieu of having to pass NMUSIC either. Bearcat (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTINHERITED. If it wasn't for his father, this article would have never existed. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:06, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Good luck to him as he makes some money playing the songs of his genius father, but he does not inherit the elder's notability. On his own he only appears in occasional gig announcements, and even those talk about his father more than him. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:37, 8 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. Participants formed consensus that the citations allowed the subject to pass WP:GNG. No users !voted keep either. (non-admin closure) - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 11:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gouken[edit]

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

Doesn't meet WP:SIGCOV guidelines with poor reception section that's either about his gameplay or, you guessed it, the usual listicles. Merge with List of Street Fighter characters. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 04:21, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep This one is overstepping I'm afraid, I believe it has SIGCOV. Even in the article itself, there are a Gamespot article and IGN article, both with critical opinions about Gouken as a character. He also is mentioned in PLAY magazine here, which, while not containing opinions for the most part, I'd say wraps up the GNG issue due to the sizable mention. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:44, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He's certainly in good company in the Play article, but the other two are primarily about his gameplay and don't go in-depth about the character itself. Is gameplay coverage part of VG SIGCOV guidelines? Too much and it starts veering into WP:GAMEGUIDE territory. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 17:47, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the gameplay coverage could help notability, I was wrong lol. "Changed my vote". GlatorNator (ᴛ) 18:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I guess Gouken could be just barely notable like Balrog (Street Fighter) and Fei Long. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 10:00, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It also may be a possibility to merge Sheng Long into the article as a section. Given that Gouken is essentially the official version of Sheng Long, it seems possibly redundant. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:03, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting idea. Given that article is a GA, it could be a bit controversial for other editors to propose merging it. But I would support a merge if initiated. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 10:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given that it became a GA in 2009, it was literally right as Gouken was released to the public. Up until that point, the character had always been Sheng Long, so there was some confusion. However, there is direct proof that Gouken IS meant to be Sheng Long, according to the devs, so there seems to be no reason to keep them separate. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Being completely honest I think that would be a terrible idea, as that'd probably lead to some confusion, especially given Sheng Long almost ended up a character himself in that SF movie game.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:45, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article literally says "Ono later confirmed in an interview with Play magazine that Gouken's inclusion in the title was fan service in response to fans requesting Sheng Long's presence in the game". Not sure how much more direct it has to be. I wouldn't mind trying to get Gouken to Good Article to make up for Sheng Long losing its GA status, assuming the article is kept and merge happens. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:05, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's specifically about his inclusion in Street Fighter IV however. Gouken was created well before that and his name even comes from a separate publication. Akuma has more direct correlation with the rumor. Trying to squeeze Gouken in there when the character was inspired by multiple sources doesn't make sense.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sheng Long should definitely remain a standalone article as he's far more notable. If we're talking about merging, Gouken should probably be merged into SL instead of the other way around. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 17:52, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Sources presented above might be useful for the character's notability. Unfortunately, the article right now is in bad shape. Very unlikely someone will improve it. Merge Per Kung Fu Man source analysis on Play. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 11:57, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into the character list. This is going to be a change of pace for me, but while the sources above are good they're primarily about his gameplay, and not discussing his design or character which is what's more needed for a standalone article. The play article is significant, but primarily discussing the Sheng Long April Fool's joke there. I don't think this one has notability on his own.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A character's gameplay can be relevant as long as there's actual analysis of it. Simply listing out moves they can do is not SIGCOV. However, going indepth as to what moves are good and in what situations can potentially be SIGCOV. In GameSpot's case, it has analysis such as "he'll quickly become a fan fave thanks to his strong offensive skills (particularly the ability to send angled hadokens, which makes him a tough opponent to approach via the air)." Which is more than just "Gouken will be fun to play, maybe, possibly, well it seems cool, sayonara"! ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:02, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gameplay usually is important for notablity if there's exceptional discussion about it (think like say Rugal's insane difficulty, or a character having a signature move that's memed heavily, stuff like that). How would those move analysis help a reader understand Gouken's signfigance outside of being a Street Fighter IV character?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would point you to the PLAY Magazine article, which states that fan demand for "Sheng Long" was so strong he was made into a real character by developers, an unusual example of fans influencing a developer to change their own game. (But since you don't believe Sheng Long and Gouken are that closely linked, per below, I predict I would have a difficult time convincing you that is relevant).

Yes, Gouken existed as a separate character from Sheng Long, but the decision to put him in the game with that design was undeniably based on the EGM hoax - as stated in reliable sources. A separate PLAY interview states Gouken was added as "fanservice" for Sheng Long. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:49, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Zxcvbnm, there is literally concept art of Gouken for Street Fighter Alpha, seen here, which itself was based off Ryu's mentor in the Street Fighter II: Ryu manga seen here, down to the name. I get wanting to keep an article, but even with this your idea falls apart because notability isn't inherited. You'd be better off trying to find sources to keep Gouken afloat on its own accord.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:10, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: While the reception section is admittedly poor (at least in its current state), that's a pretty impressive development section. Also, keep in mind that Gouken, much like Akuma before him, as born out of the whole Sheng Long urban legend, giving a good source for notability. Gouken is also discussed here, and while I can't access the whole thing, this seems discuss him some too. The sources shown here shows that he has enough for a small, but notable, article, which is the main reason notability exists. MoonJet (talk) 21:14, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The thesis, while a good read, mentions Gouken all of three times in passing in a 162-page document. That won’t do it. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 01:34, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To be sure I think coverage is pretty slim, but Gouken has two articles entirely about his moves and how good they are, which is more than can be said about other characters. I also think that the PLAY Magazine article can be used to reliably argue that Sheng Long should be merged into Gouken per WP:OVERLAP, as "two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap and might be WP:REDUNDANT", which would make him notable beyond a doubt. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:31, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the April Fools page from EGM itself, which uses Gouken and Sheng Long interchangeably. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because by Street Fighter III, Gouken was established as a character, and the joke of Sheng Long being Ryu's master doesn't work the same. Gouken was established thanks to the Street Fighter II: Ryu manga, and appears in concept art and even Akuma's ending for Street Fight Alpha, well before Ono had any bearing on the series' direction. Outside of his inclusion in Street Fighter IV, the EGM Sheng Long joke has no bearing on Gouken's development, and far more on Akuma's development, which was in direct response to the rumor running rampant. This idea makes no sense, Zxcvbnm.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:08, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per significant coverage demonstrated by other editors. Merko (talk) 18:21, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Adequate citations seem to have been found. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 11:29, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 15:00, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Don't really have much to add, but looking through the sources, I also agree that the sources provided prove he passes WP:GNG. PantheonRadiance (talk) 23:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I went and found an MA thesis that talks about the back story a bit, people will really write a thesis about anything I guess. As it stands now the article passes WP:GNG. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 05:49, 13 May 2023 (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.

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 Draftify‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Climate and trade nexus in Africa[edit]

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

WP:NOTESSAY and possible WP:OR. Web search shows the existence of trade–climate nexus or trade and climate change nexus, but we don't have such articles. I don't think we need such a narrow topic. Also multiple orange tags. Brandmeister^talk 07:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Economics, Environment, and Africa. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:17, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a bit tricky because the term is absolutely in use in the academic literature. The page is badly written to the extent that it looks like WP:OR. Suggest maybe it should be draftified or WP:TNT JMWt (talk) 09:31, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify as likely to be a notable topic but really just a half-finished essay for the moment. Mccapra (talk) 11:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've seen and fixed worse, and if nothing else the sources that are already there are a good start and will be very helpful when an eventual rewrite comes along. A poorly written article is still easier to fix than a non-existent one. To put it short and good: I don't think it's quite so bad as to be worthy of TNT. --Licks-rocks (talk) 09:43, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There does seem to be enough discussion of this in reliable secondary sources to indicate notability. There are certainly concerns about WP:NOTESSAY and possibly WP:OR but I agree with Licks-rocks that there is enough there for an editor to work with. WJ94 (talk) 10:19, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 14:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify This is a notable topic, however it appears to be half-finished, essay-like, and in need of a re-write. I don't think it should stay in mainspace in the state that it is in. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:09, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on basis of points put forward by Licks-rocks and WJ94 Jack4576 (talk) 14:40, 11 May 2023 (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.

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 redirect‎ to Top Shot. ✗plicit 11:56, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Reed (marksman)[edit]

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

Lacks significant coverage, maybe redirect to Top Shot. US-Verified (talk) 11:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Mississippi. Shellwood (talk) 11:55, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as per nom. Both of the cited sources are Q&As (primary sources), and no other significant coverage of the subject can be found. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 14:01, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
redirect is fine. All I can find is this one line mention [2], Field and Stream is an interview. Doesn't seem to have done much before or after winning the show. Oaktree b (talk) 14:48, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Top Shot: no SIGCOV in article or WP:BEFORE search. Any potential sources I found are just interviews or very trivial mentions. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 16:49, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:21, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Teeranun Chiangta[edit]

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

PROD objected, reason was there were some achievements. However the achievements does not even pass NBAD; fails GNG and BASIC too. No coverage about him found. Timothytyy (talk) 00:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Badminton, and Thailand. Timothytyy (talk) 00:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Move to draft No significant coverage found. I can't find any reliable, secondary sources that don't just pass mention about this person. The person who loves reading (talk) 03:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep just because WP:NBAD doesn't include it, it doesn't mean twice medalist at the Southeast Asian Games will not have merit to have an article. I believe it should be kept as per. zoglophie 04:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep two medals in Southeast Asian Games. He reached third round at the Olympics. Stvbastian (talk) 08:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - according to de.wiki his name in Thai is ธีรนันท์ เชียงทา but I'm getting no decent results when searching. If he fails WP:NBAD, WP:NOLY, WP:SPORTBASIC and WP:GNG, which nobody seems to be disputing, then I don't see any guideline-centred reason for keeping this. Maybe redirect to Badminton at the 1992 Summer Olympics – Men's singles at best. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails to meet the notability requirements in WP:GNG

1keyhole (talk) 04:42, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Two medals in Southeast Asian Games. He reached third round at the Olympics. Florentyna (talk) 17:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

None of which has relevance to WP:NBAD, WP:NOLY, WP:SPORTBASIC and WP:GNG Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I am personally convinced that this person would meet GNG if there was more internet reporting on badminton in Thailand in the early 90s... the argument I present is that the Western bias in sourcing and achievement requirements is probably at play and we should at least revisit those past discussion proposals of allowing more wiggle room for non-Western and historic subjects in some areas. Kingsif (talk) 22:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Modussiccandi (talk) 11:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clearly fails GNG and I would be more inclined to keep if I could find more than 1 source on the wiki page. I cannot analyze only 1 source. Nagol0929 (talk) 12:24, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also this blatantly fails WP:SPORTBASIC #5 Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Could not find many sources for him. Heart ^(talk) 00:47, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks in-depth coverage to meet WP:NBIO. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I tried look for material in Thai and English and couldn't find anything. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 05:56, 13 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 11:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Elliot Bogod[edit]

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

Non-notable real estate agent. Fails WP:SIGCOV. US-Verified (talk) 11:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and New York. Shellwood (talk) 11:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He penned his own article for the Forbes Council, and sells expensive real estate as shown in the New York Times. PROMO and non-notable as a businessperson. Oaktree b (talk) 13:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unremarkable businessman. None of the references go any way to establishing notability.TheLongTone (talk) 14:06, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails SIGCOV as I only could find passing mentions. Nagol0929 (talk) 14:13, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: non-notable and fails sigcov. Additionally, the article shows signs of WP:REFBOMBING and the original contributor has since been banned for sockpuppetry. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 16:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: coverage is mostly from profiles, directories and podcasts, which are non-acceptable types of citations.Hkkingg (talk) 07:40, 7 May 2023 (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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 11:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pankaj Choudhary (professor)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NPROF. Assistant professors are almost always non-notable. US-Verified (talk) 11:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Politicians, and India. Shellwood (talk) 11:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Rajasthan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:54, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. Consensus to keep the article exists. The nominator now also agrees it should be kept. (non-admin closure) - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 00:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Abe Conlon[edit]

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

Other than a minor award he received, there is nothing significant about him. UPE history doesn't help. US-Verified (talk) 11:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Food and drink, and Massachusetts. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails SIGCOV as I could only find passing mentions. However his restaurant would probably be more notable than him. Nagol0929 (talk) 14:26, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Buote, Brenda J. (2014-06-07). "Noted chef Abraham Conlon returns to Tyngsborough". The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Abraham Conlon, a Greater Lowell Technical High School alumnus, has traveled the world in pursuit of culinary inspiration. Over the past 15 years, he has studied and worked at restaurants across the country and in the Caribbean, Europe, and Asia. The celebrated chef’s journey came full circle last month when he returned to his alma mater to be honored as the school’s 2014 Distinguished Alumnus. It was the first time since 2004 that the school has honored a graduate. ... It is the kind of success Conlon dreamed of as a teenager, when he worked as an intern at Stonehedge Inn in Tyngsborough."
2. Sobey, Rick (2013-10-14). "Lowell native is cookin' -- in Chicago". The Sun. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Abraham Conlon is a 32-year-old Lowell native who used to whip up treats at Greater Lowell Technical High School in Tyngsboro.Today, Conlon is the chef and co-owner of the Windy City's Fat Rice restaurant, which opened last November. ... Conlon comes from a Portuguese background and said he became interested in cooking through his grandmother. ... After high school and Cobblestones, Conlon attended the Culinary Institute of America in Hyde Park, N.Y. After cooking in the Dominican Republic and Virginia, where he became the youngest chef to be awarded the Four Diamond Award by AAA, Conlon settled in Chicago and started an underground dinner experience: He would serve people 10-course meals out of his living room."
3. Kierzek, Kristine M. (2016-11-08). "Chicago chef highlights foods of Macau". Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "While classically trained at the Culinary Institute of America, Abraham Conlon’s cooking comes down to a cultural conversation with food. Every recipe is an exploration of history and taste. ... That’s the root of Conlon’s new cookbook, “The Adventures of Fat Rice: Recipes from the Chicago Restaurant Inspired by Macau” (Ten Speed Press, $35), written with his business partner and restaurant co-owner, Adrienne Lo, and former sous chef Hugh Amano."
4. Anderson, Brett (2020-06-16). "A Top Chicago Restaurant Messaged Its Virtue. Then Workers Spoke Up. Since Fat Rice proclaimed its support for justice, former employees have come forward with complaints that its chef created a hostile work environment". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Nearly all of the 20 former Fat Rice employees who spoke to The New York Times in recent days described Mr. Conlon, 39, as an extreme example of a restaurant-business archetype: a tantrum-prone chef who rules by fear and bullying. He ended one staff meeting, they said, by dumping a can of garbage onto the floor, and flew into fits of anger so severe onlookers feared they would lead to violence. ... In 2018, Mr. Conlon won the James Beard award for Best Chef in the Great Lakes Region"
5. Moore, Evan F. (2020-06-08). "Abraham Conlon, Fat Rice co-owner, issues apology 'for those I have hurt,' amid bullying allegations". Chicago Sun-Times. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Abraham Conlon, the co-owner of Fat Rice, a recently-shuttered Portuguese/Macanese restaurant, released a statement Sunday via his Instagram feed titled “For those I have hurt” amid allegations claiming bullying, threats, and racially insensitive behavior toward employees."
6. Nunzio, Miriam Di (2018-05-08). "Chicago's Abraham Conlon emerges victorious at the 2018 James Beard Awards". Chicago Sun-Times. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Fat Rice owner/chef Abraham Conlon beat out four other Chicago chefs for the title best chef Great Lakes Region at this year’s gala awards ceremony held at the Lyric Opera House. The co-owner (with his partner Adrienne Lo) of the Portuguese/Macanese Logan Square eatery finally snagged the prestigious recognition, which has eluded him on two previous occasions."
7. "Chef Battle: Abraham Conlon". WBEZ. 2018-03-13. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Abraham Conlon to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 22:07, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Cunard. I'm happy to withdraw this nomination. US-Verified (talk) 11:27, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard, WP:GNG, and WP:HEY. gidonb (talk) 21:59, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per Gidonb. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:46, 13 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. No consensus to rename, but this can be discussed further on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:07, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brother Marcellus Luck[edit]

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

Interviews, promtional coverage in trade publications. WP:ATD: redirect to Beat Bobby Flay. Fails WP:GNG. US-Verified (talk) 11:17, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, California, and Colorado. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO with most sources in the article and online being interviews. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:23, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Wilson, Korsha (2018-03-12). "'Top Chef' Star Brother Luck Isn't Here to Define His Food By Race". Vice. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Luck was born in San Francisco and spent time abroad with his parents (who lived in Japan for several years and worked as travelling exotic dancers across Asia). But as a fair-skinned, half-Creole and half-Cajun, biracial man, Luck says he’s used to people trying to figure out his race. ... After his father’s death, Luck says his mother “did the best she could” to raise him and his younger brother, but by the time he was 16, his mother was in prison and he was the provider for himself and his younger brother. They were living in San Francisco, where he dealt drugs to make quick money, and then moved to Phoenix to live with a cousin, where Luck joined a culinary arts vocational class to “get a free lunch.”"
2. Wrenn, Colin (2019-11-05). "Brother Luck's Colorado Springs Restaurants Live Up to His TV Fame". 303 Magazine. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Brother Luck has been on television a lot. He did the remarkable and beat Bobby Flay and followed that with two seasons on Top Chef shortly thereafter. He’s received a lot of press and a lot of praise for these appearances. Each one of his flirtations with the limelight has garnered the Colorado Springs-based restaurateur a great deal of well-deserved attention, but for kitchen-maestro born Brother Marcellus Haywood Luck IV this is just one chapter in a culinary epic that stretches back to adolescence."
3. Bloom, Mike (2019-01-11). "Top Chef Kentucky: Brother Luck on Redemption and Rejection". Parade. Archived from the original on 2023-05-07. Retrieved 2023-05-07.
  The article notes: "Brother Luck would be the first to tell you about the similarities and differences between Last Chance Kitchen and the proper Top Chef competition. They both have the same fundamental ingredients but use them in completely different techniques. ... Of the competitors from Top Chef seasons past and present that Brother faced in Last Chance Kitchen, he had far and away the most experience. After his elimination in Colorado, he racked up win after win in Last Chance Kitchen, only to lose at the very end to Joe Flamm."
4. Lee, Alina (2023-01-21). "Virtual cooking classes with local celebrity, Chef Brother Luck". KXRM-TV. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "When he isn’t wowing taste buds, local celebrity, Chef Brother Luck, is pushing the culinary boundaries and inspiring large audiences across the nation – starting here in Colorado Springs with cheeseburger dumplings. ... Chef Luck is a James Beard nominee, and a fan favorite on culinary competition shows like Top Chef, Chopped, and Beat Bobby Flay. He’s recently appeared on the Rachael Ray Show, the Today Show, and was featured in Food and Wine Magazine. ... Luck is the owner of Lucky Dumpling, The Studio, and Four by Brother Luck in Downtown Colorado Springs."
5. Grossman, Bryan (2015-03-16). "Luck in love with local food scene". Colorado Springs Business Journal. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Brother Luck (yes, his real name), is the proprietor and executive chef of the relatively new Brother Luck Street Eats located on West Colorado Avenue. Luck oversees all restaurant operations, including the sourcing and preparation of seasonal, farm-to-table fare, much of it from local distributors. He hadn’t always been the boss, however, as he recalls his first restaurant job, washing dishes at 14 years old. ... Luck was born in San Francisco and grew up in Oakland’s inner city. ... Luck said he essentially earned his degree from the Art Institute of Phoenix at no charge. He paid for his tuition with winnings he’d earned as a competitive chef while attending the institute. Following graduation, he was newly married and still a teenager when he moved to Colorado Springs to be closer to his wife’s family."
6. Leon, Shoshana (2022-09-22). "Chef Brother Luck Returns to Phoenix to Share His Story". Frontdoors Media. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "After his father passed away when Luck was 10 years old and the family fell on hard times, they moved from San Francisco to Phoenix. Luck studied culinary arts at Metro Tech High School and the Art Institute of Phoenix and received a C-CAP scholarship. ... Luck worked at the Hyatt Regency in downtown Phoenix and moved on to work at Hyatt properties in San Antonio, Chicago and Colorado. His career took him around the world and he settled in Colorado Springs. His signature restaurant Four is inspired by the Four Corners where Colorado, Arizona, Utah and New Mexico meet."
7. Reedy, Allyson (2018-01-15). ""Top Chef" Colorado: Local chef Brother Luck reflects on elimination, German egg rolls". The Denver Post. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Last week, in spite of “Top Chef” host Padma Lakshmi saying “Brother’s dish was the yummiest” at judging, Colorado Springs chef Brother Luck was told to pack his knives and go. His German egg rolls didn’t quite fit the Elitch Gardens Elimination Challenge to pair authentic German food with a radler (half beer, half fruit soda), the other judges (including D Bar’s Keegan Gerhard) determined."
8. Antonation, Mark (2017-01-23). "Brother Luck and Other Colorado Chefs Who Have Appeared on Chopped". Westword. Archived from the original on 2023-05-07. Retrieved 2023-05-07.
  The article notes: "Luck, who's the fourth generation to bear the name (although the first to have it listed on his birth certificate; the previous three generations were officially named Marcellus Luck), is the chef/owner of Brother Luck Street Eats in Colorado Springs, where the menu is inspired by street food from around the world. Luck appeared on the "Beast Feast" episode of Chopped, which first aired on November 22 last year."
9. The Gazette articles:
  1. Farney, Teresa (2022-08-19). "Colorado Springs chef Brother Luck bringing something new — with a message". The Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
    The article notes: "Brother Luck has written a memoir, “No Lucks Given,” about the trials and tribulations of life from a tough childhood, life lessons learned on the streets, in kitchens and counseling sessions. Luck has been a chef 17 years and is the owner of Four By Brother Luck and Lucky Dumpling, both in Colorado Springs. You’ll read about his experiences of being on reality cooking-competition shows including “Chopped,” “Beat Bobby Flay” (who he did beat) and two seasons of Bravo’s “Top Chef.”"
  2. Farney, Teresa (2023-01-11). "Brother Luck teaching online classes, launching a foodie group and releasing audible book". The Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
    The article notes: "Brother Luck, owner of Four by Brother Luck, Lucky Dumpling and The Studio, is offering his online cooking classes again. The classes were a big success during the pandemic shutdown and now he is bringing them back."
  3. Farney, Teresa (2019-01-12). "Colorado Springs chef Brother Luck says good bye to 'Last Chance Kitchen'". The Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
    The article notes: "Luck has competed and hung in for 10 "Last Chance Kitchen" segments, the online companion cooking contest to Bravo’s "Top Chef." Episode 6 of "Last Chance Kitchen" ended in a cliffhanger. We didn’t know if Luck had won the coveted spot to return to "Top Chef.""
  4. Farney, Teresa (2020-04-28). "Colorado Springs celebrity chef Brother Luck reopens Lucky Dumpling kitchen". The Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
    The article notes: "Brother Luck and his wife, Tina, have relaunched Lucky Dumpling kitchen in Colorado Springs with a full menu for curbside takeout."
  5. Farney, Teresa J. (2015-12-14). "Colorado Springs chef Brother Luck wins spot on Food Network challenge". The Gazette. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
    The article notes: "Brother Luck is enjoying some good fortune. Months ago, the chef-owner of Brother Luck Street Eats set his sights on becoming a contender on Food Network's "Chopped: Impossible Restaurant Challenge." ... On Monday, Luck got his wish. He and his wife, Tina, will be flying to New York City at the end of January to film the contest."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Brother Luck to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 00:08, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard, the WP:GNG, and WP:HEY. gidonb (talk) 22:00, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also rename to Brother Luck per WP:COMMONNAME. gidonb (talk) 15:56, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard, the subject meets GNG. Rath Butcher (talk) 03:37, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Due to source analysis by Cunard. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:45, 13 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:06, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Sarasin[edit]

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

Interviews, promtional coverage in trade publications. Fails WP:GNG. US-Verified (talk) 11:16, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Food and drink, and New Hampshire. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:17, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Bailey, Kathleen D. (2018-11-23). "Holiday cooking with roots". New Hampshire Union Leader. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Keith Sarasin, a Nashua-based chef, knew things had to change when he worked in elegant Boston restaurants. He couldn’t stand working with the tomatoes the restaurants ordered, California veggies picked green and ripened with chemicals. ... Sarasin quit, moved back to the Nashua area and founded The Farmers Dinner, a concept that brings growers, interested diners and like-minded chefs together for an evening of locally sourced food. ... Sarasin migrated to Boston, where he honed his passion for cooking as an executive chef. He made it to the top, then quit to pursue his own vision: cooking and sourcing food from as close to home as possible. He volunteered at area farms for six months and saw food come right out of the ground."
2. Forrest, Rachel (2021-05-29). "All about meat: New cookbook from The Farmers Dinner chef Keith Sarasin". The Portsmouth Herald. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Chef Keith Sarasin spent a large part of his COVID-19 quarantine time writing an 800-page cookbook centered around a single topic. Working 70 hour weeks for seven months, he produced "Meat: The Ultimate Cookbook" (Cider Mill Press, May, 2021), a gorgeously photographed and designed primer that includes butchering techniques and tips on how to choose just the right cut of beef, pork, or chicken for the 300 original recipes within. ... This is the third book from the New Hampshire chef who founded The Farmers Dinner, a series of dinners featuring New England grown and produced ingredients and one that comes with a sprinkle of irony."
3. Morin, Mike (2017-06-09). "Q&A with local food impresario Keith Sarasin". New Hampshire Business Review. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Keith Sarasin’s life journey in food service began at 14, with his first job at Red Lobster. Today, at 35, the Nashua resident is founder and CEO of The Farmers Dinner, a business that exclusively presents community dinners, bringing New Hampshire farmers and chefs together, using all locally raised products from beans to brisket."
4. Provost, Mary-Paige (2021-08-03). Cahoon, Brendan (ed.). "New Hampshire Chronicle: Spicing things up with Chef Keith Sarasin". WMUR-TV. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Tonight, we are cooking up some mouth-watering dishes with Chef Keith Sarasin. Chef Sarasin is an author, chef, restauranteur, founder of The Farmers Dinner, and a passionate student of Indian cuisine. He takes us through his culinary journey and cooks up some delicious dishes in the process."
5. Forrest, Rachel (2018-11-15). "Turkey time: Chef Keith Sarasin on creative ways to spice up a classic". The Portsmouth Herald. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Although his book is titled "The Perfect Turkey" (Cider Mill Press, 2018), chef Keith Sarasin says the most important thing to remember about cooking your Thanksgiving turkey this year is that you should never worry about perfection. ... But if you do want to get as close to poultry perfection as possible, Sarasin’s cool little book will help. While it’s chock full of recipes for sides and desserts including gravy and cranberry sauce, turkey takes center stage in all its many preparations – smoked, spatchcocked, grilled, roasted and even sous vide. If you’re wondering about which rubs and brines to use (both wet and dry brines), he includes plenty of ideas for that, too."
6. Ríos, Simón (2011-11-30). "'Local' comes to the corner bar". New Hampshire Union Leader. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Keith Sarasin is a man who likes it local. Whether it’s his burger, his eggnog, or the music playing in his MP3 player, it’s just not the same if it comes from more than 15 miles away. And now he’s going public with it. Sitting at the top of a hill on a Hollis farm with bartender Jared Bracci in June, Sarasin first spoke the idea of a "local night" at the Old Amsterdam Bar and Lounge in Nashua. ... Sarasin had booked Jackson, the musician he manages, to play Amsterdam every Wednesday night."
7. Forrest, Rachel (2020-09-23). "Wine Me Dine Me: Learn to cook Indian food from Chef Keith Sarasin". The Portsmouth Herald. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "Playing a video game with a childhood friend was the catalyst for chef Keith Sarasin’s appreciation of Indian cuisine. Now, two decades later, he’s helping Americans understand just what he loves about Indian home cooking through a new YouTube channel and a series of virtual cooking classes. The first hour-long class is Oct. 4. ... Shelat has since retired and while she offered Sarasin the chance to purchase the market, the chef was running Greenleaf Restaurant in Milford. He’s since left Greenleaf and can now concentrate on continuing The Farmer’s Dinner series where guests will often enjoy a dish from Sarasin’s Indian cuisine repertoire as well as his new YouTube channel, which covers Indian cuisine and history and live Indian cooking classes."
8. Prescott, Virginia (2017-04-06). "Foodstuffs: A Mud Season Meal". New Hampshire Public Radio. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The article notes: "So I asked Keith Sarasin to help jolt me out of my habitual dishes. He’s chef and founder of The Farmers Dinner. He and his crew do on-site, farm-to-table dinners using locally produced foods. ... Keith is more than a food whisperer; he’s a local produce booster. He refers to sunchokes as “the New England truffle” and looks most kindly upon imperfect vegetables, like the parsnip with tiny bug trails or the carrot gnarled by New England’s rocky soil."
9. Laughlin, Susan (2018-10-18). "The Perfect Turkey: Local chef Keith Sarasin's new cookbook contains 100 recipes for creating the ultimate holiday feast". New Hampshire. Archived from the original on 2023-05-06. Retrieved 2023-05-06.
  The book review notes: "Local chef Keith Sarasin, founder of The Farmers Dinner, created the consummate guide to Thanksgiving dinner. His new book “The Perfect Turkey” starts with a fresh take on this traditional feast, including options for preparing turkey that range from frying or grilling to smoking. There are even instructions for a sous vide bird and spatchcocking for a quicker turnaround. You’ll find imaginative recipes for dry rubs and brines that spice and juice up the bird. ... The book is great for beginners, but also gives insight to seasoned veterans of the Thanksgiving table."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Keith Sarasin to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 23:12, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The three sources that are his own books, probably should be sectioned off and bulleted as part of the article. But first six sources are reliable, and enough for this stub. — Maile (talk) 01:09, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As per above argument by Cunard, chef is notable for Wikipedia inclusion. Rath Butcher (talk) 03:36, 8 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 12:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arshad Hassan[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:NPOL, and while there is coverage of him, it is all trivial and does not meet WP:SIGCOV. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:27, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 10:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: He served as Deputy Mayor of Karachi which is 12th largest city in the world and largest city in a country. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 13:09, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Deputy Mayor's aren't notable. Oaktree b (talk) 20:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So why members of Philadelphia City Council has been kept in deletion discussion? 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 04:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 𝘚𝘢𝘯𝘦𝘮𝘈𝘺𝘩𝘢𝘯07 16:13, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify- Some times I feel unrest, when I see potential good article that should be improved on or moved to draft for improvement instead of nominating it for deletion.Robin499 (talk) 21:56, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Karachi Metropolitan Corporation and that one line in the article about Deputy Mayor could be added to 2023 Karachi local government elections as well if that's what merging is. Muneebll (talk) 13:31, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:26, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The position of deputy mayor is not an automatic pass of WP:NPOL and the sources are not sufficient to pass WP:GNG. The subject is not mentioned in the redirect target Karachi Metropolitan Corporation, so it is not appropriate to redirect there. --Enos733 (talk) 16:06, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:POLOUTCOMES: "precedent has tended to favor keeping members of the main citywide government of internationally famous metropolitan areas such as Toronto, Chicago, Tokyo, or London." I've not time to search, but it would be surprising that there's no sourcing in Urdu available... Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 09:46, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP is policy, POLOUTCOMES is not. // Timothy :: talk 21:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure what this has to do with my *comment*. We've deleted members of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi before for lack of sources (I supported that deletion FWIW). I'm not arguing to keep this in the absence of sourcing, I'm noting surprise about a lack of Urdu-language sourcing...but I'm assuming no Urdu-language searching has been done. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 21:14, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: BLP, fails GNG and BIO. Article and BEFORE showed nothing but pol promo and routine news, nothing from IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"'; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per well known core policy (WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines (WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV). // Timothy :: talk 20:59, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Here's some multi-year results from a 15 minute search in Urdu: detailed report on Hassan's election as deputy mayor,^[3] passing mention in MM News report on Hassan serving as acting mayor of Karachi due to the mayor visiting USA,^[4] AUJ News report on Hassan at 2020 independence day activities,^[5] report mentioning Hassan after term as deputy mayor.^[6]

References

^ "What nanomachines promise for the humanity". Dataconomy. 14 March 2022. Retrieved 11 May 2023.
^ Dockrill, Peter (15 April 2019). "We Are Closer Than Ever to Merging Human Brains With The Cloud". ScienceAlert. Retrieved 11 May 2023.
^ "ڈپٹی میئر کراچی ارشد حسن کی تقریب حلف برداری کا انعقاد". Daily Pakistan (in Urdu). 26 April 2019.
^ ڈیسک, ویب (19 January 2020). "میئر وسیم اختر کی امریکا روانگی: ارشد حسن قائم مقام میئر کراچی بن گئے". MM NEWS URDU (in Urdu).
^ Mahmood, Talat (12 August 2020). "یوم آزادی کا دن انتہائی خوشی اور شادمانی کا دن ہے، ڈپٹی میئر کراچی سید ارشد حسن | Auj News" (in Urdu).
^ "کراچی میں ایم کیو ایم رہنماؤں کا بوتراب اور انچولی کے امام بارگاہوں کا دورہ، منتظمین سے ملاقات". اسلام ٹائمز (in Urdu). 5 August 2022.

This kind of coverage is suggestive of further materials being available, but I'm on the fence on this precisely because at the moment I do not have the time to conduct further searching to find enough materials to unambiguously satisfy the GNG. This is, however, one of the largest cities in the world and it would appear strange that the mayors and deputy mayors of such a city would not be notable. FWIW - the reason we need strict applications within BLPs is not related to specific problems related to our policies on notability or sourcing, but rather the need for assurity in regards to verification. There are no specific BLP issues at play here in any way separate from satisfying the GNG (there is no contestible content or content being challenged). A lack of high quality SIGCOV reliable sourcing versus adequate SIGCOV reliable sourcing to satisfy the GNG is not going to impede the creation of a biogrpahy, what might impede its elaboration are specific contested issues where high quality sourcing would be required to include/exclude those contested issues (see WP:BLPSOURCES). Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 03:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for finding several sources. I do think that the expectation of local officials is that coverage illustrates more than they "exist;" that the coverage points to actions that the official took while in office or the legacy of the elected official. I do not think that the community believes that passing mentions of serving as acting mayor, speeches or ribbon cuttings, or other routing mentions are sufficient to pass GNG - Enos733 (talk) 16:26, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I am going to break the rules and relist for a fourth time to allow editors to react to the Urdu sources that were presented on 2 May.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 10:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - regarding the four Urdu sources, none are in-depth about the individual. The first is a brief article about him being sworn in, the second is a brief blurb about the mayor leaving and Hassan taking over his duties, the third is about an announcement he made regarding Independence Day, and the fourth is a brief routine coverage about him meeting with a UN delegation.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The position if deputy mayor isn't notable in itself, and sources fail to show SIGCOV/GNG. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:40, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:NPOL, WP:SIGCOV has not been found. Would gladly change my !vote if broader coverage becomes apparent. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:12, 9 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Courcelles (talk) 14:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Hoult[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a person not properly referenced as passing any Wikipedia notability criteria. The notability claims here are that he ran in (but did not win) a mayoral election and that he's chairman of a company, but neither of those are automatic inclusion freebies in and of themselves -- unsuccessful mayoral candidates get articles only if they can be properly established as having some other claim of preexisting notability for other reasons, and chairmen of companies get articles only if they can be shown to pass GNG on their sourcing. But there are just three footnotes here, of which one is his own LinkedIn (a primary source that does not support notability at all), one is verification of his candidacy and one is verification that he founded the company, which does not add up to enough coverage to establish permanent notability as a businessman. Bearcat (talk) 14:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and England. Bearcat (talk) 14:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Times article though would suggest that he does meet the verification requirements. JBD67 (talk) 13:36, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It takes a lot more than just one newspaper article to meet inclusion criteria. One source is enough to clinch inclusion in Wikipedia only if that one source is verifying passage of an "inherent" notability criterion, such as winning election to an NPOL-clinching office, but nothing here counts as an "inherent" notability claim at all. So the only basis for a Wikipedia article would be "passes WP:GNG because media coverage exists", but that would require a lot more media coverage than has been shown here and still isn't clinched just because one footnote happens to lead to The Times. Bearcat (talk) 13:43, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Typically in the United States a single-time loser of a lower-level election wouldn't be notable. But there is more press coverage of this subject than I expected.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 15:37, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment He has been written about in both the Times and the Evening Standard. This shows that he has met the verification requirements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBD67 (talk • contribs) 10:49, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:48, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Verification" is not the same as notability. Lots of people can be "verified" as having lived and done something, but they are not necessarily notable. Delete as an also-ran. Lamona (talk) 02:48, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I mean that verification meets notability. He has more independent sources listed about him than many other non notable people who have wikipedia pages. JBD67 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply] JBD67 (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is also an FT article about him, which along with the Times and Evening Standard ones, shows that he is notable https://www.ft.com/content/fa1c4514-ec35-11df-9e11-00144feab49a JBD67 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply] JBD67 (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES, campaign coverage and local political coverage should be discounted when evaluating notability for politicians. I don't think that WP:GNG is met. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 10:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails NPOL as an unelected candidate, and what isn't about the elections doesn't meet GNG. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 17:33, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. While there is some concern that bus routes violate WP:NOTDIRECTORY the consensus among participating editors is that there is enough coverage of this particular bus route to establish notability. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

London Buses route 5[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

There is no evidence of notability and goes against WP:NOT 1keyhole (talk) 04:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, multiple book sources are evidence for notability. Have you looked at and evaluated these? As for NOT, you’re going to have to expand on that. Garuda3 (talk) 07:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to those in the article, this book likely has WP:SIGCOV. Garuda3 (talk) 07:44, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete. I haven't evaluated the sources presented, but if this is not individually notable it should be merged and redirected to List of bus routes in London. Everything here verifies that this is a member of a notable set (bus routes in London) and consensus is that at least some members of that set are individually notable, so every member is a plausible search term that should be a blue link. Thryduulf (talk) 12:09, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. I think also worth bearing in mind that the list of bus routes in London page is very long already, and so it makes sense to split content out into individual pages rather than try to cram more in. I think the best solution is to keep this as a separate article. Garuda3 (talk) 15:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:NOTDIR and WP:NOTTRAVEL --TheInsatiableOne (talk) 16:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see anything in those guidelines that prohibits articles on bus routes. Garuda3 (talk) 16:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sitting on the fence on this article, but NOTDIR doesn't apply in this case, as it's got nothing in it that resembles a directory, and NOTTRAVEL applies mostly to content (in this case, there's not a lot of stuff pertaining to be a travel guide - bar the list of destinations which is common across all other London bus routes). So the real question is does it satisfy WP:GNG. Ajf773 (talk) 03:11, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTDIR specifies that "Wikipedia is not a directory of everything in the universe that exists or has existed" which this article trips over. A bus route by itself isn't notable. TheInsatiableOne (talk) 18:46, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How does it trip over? You could use that vague argument to delete anything you don’t like. Garuda3 (talk) 21:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TheInsatiableOne: A topic is notable in the Wikipedia sense if it has been the subject of in-depth coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. There is no reason an individual bus route cannot be notable, indeed from memory AfDs in the past have concluded that some routes are. While you are entitled to have opinions about bus routes in general they are not at all relevant - you need to explain why this bus route is or is not notable. Thryduulf (talk) 00:57, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A bus route by itself isn't notable. - That is not necessarily correct. While it is true that bus routes aren't automatically notable, and that many or even most bus routes might not pass GNG, there's no specific carve-out to the GNG that says "bus routes are never notable". WP:NOTDIR does not allow, among other things, "simple listings without contextual information showing encyclopedic merit", but it does allow an explanation of such information that is supported by reliable secondary sources. If the bus route article were merely a listing of stop locations or a schedule of bus departures, that would be a violation of NOTDIR, but this isn't the case here, either. Similarly, WP:NOTTRAVEL refers mostly to how articles should be structured. NOTTRAVEL does not allow information that may be better suited for a travel guide, but it does allow information about transportation. if it can be presented neutrally in an encyclopedic way. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:40, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I second what @Epicgenius: has said. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 23:52, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep enough independent sources to meet the WP:GNG threshold.. Morteinmeil (talk) 03:49, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect to List of bus routes in London, clearly not notable in its own right. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 20:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This vote reads as opinion as you have provided no reasoning. Garuda3 (talk) 22:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:42, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are enough sources in the article to pass WP:GNG, and it seems to have plenty of WP:SIGCOV as well. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:01, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Just about enough here on the route's history per the sources to justify a Wikipedia article. Don't think the article falls foul of WP:NOTDIR and WP:NOTTRAVEL as there is more than a mere listing of the route's destinations and timetable. Rupples (talk) 03:56, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are enough sources in the article to pass WP:GNG Lightburst (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As is evident from the references, this bus line meets the WP:GNG. gidonb (talk) 14:11, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Coverage is WP:ROUTINE for a bus route. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I would be interested to see some source analysis --
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 10:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It's quite difficult to do a source analysis as the relister wished, since many of the cited sources don't have free online samples (And honestly I don't want to buy books or sign up for subscription just for Wikipedia). However, I'll still list my opinions of the sources for future editors to reference:

Source ＃	Evaluation	Link
1 & 2	Undetermined. The sources need subscriptions to be viewed. If it's any help, the source dated 5 February 1954 has a word count of 449. The one dated 14 May 1954 has a word count of 99 (per the BNA). Rupples (talk) 04:24, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]	WLO 1954/02/05 WLO 1954/05/14
3	Undetermined. Did not find online version	Google Books link
4	Undetermined. The article cited it for an event in 1971, which is not in the Google Books' preview.	Google Books link
5	Announcemant of extention, seems to fall under WP:ROUTINE.	Webarchive link
6	Undetermined. The citation said page 182, but the book does not seem to have page numbers. It seems to focus on individual buses instead of the route as a whole.	Google Books link
7	Undetermined. Subscription required.	CWB archive
8	Undetermined. Did not find online copy.	N/A
9	Route change, seems to fall under WP:ROUTINE.	Webarchive link
10	Includes "bus route 5" in the "River Road" section. Trivial mention.	Source link
11	Route map. Since It's published by Transport for London, it should be viewed as a primary source. Nothing wrong about citing it, but doesn't prove notability just by itself.	Source link

With the sources that I can currently access, there doesn't seem to be a strong case for keep. I don't think further discussion would be productive unless some editors are willing to purchase the books and subscriptions to verify the sources, or find other sources that other editors can verify. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 00:33, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Undortunately I don’t have access to the books either. However, the book “London bus Routes One by One :1-100” will almost certainly discuss this route, helping establish notability. Also, WP:ROUTINE is part of the events notability guideline and thus doesn’t apply here. Garuda3 (talk) 11:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. While the bus route itself is clearly not an event, any change to the route is an event or happening/occurence and hence WP:EVENTS may be used to evaluate whether the sources relating to the route change help with establishing notability of the route.

For example, the announcement of a change to a bus route that attracts no comment in reliable, secondary sources is likely routine. However, a change that attracts protests and comment could be considered non-routine, and be an indication of the route's notability.

With regard to the source table; no. 5 is an announcement by the route operator of the change and clearly doesn't count towards notability. Source 9 may indicate notability especially if the consultation referred to attracted comment/debate in the press, and/or protests, even if local. Nonetheless, how sustained any coverage was should also be considered under WP:NOTNEWS. There's coverage of the route change here [3] and here [4]. The change attracted the attention of Margaret Hodge, the MP for Barking. There's also a snippet on the speed of the route here [5]. Rupples (talk) 19:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. While I voted to redirect in the last discussion, based on lack of references, the article has been expanded since then. While I can't verify most of the new references (as mentioned above), many appear to be independent references (more than just routine coverage) and may open up a fair amount of history about this route. Given the routes low route number and has been in existence for over 60 years, and has been used in previous locations, it's probably notable. Ajf773 (talk) 10:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per the discussion so far (sources do exist, and a bus route can be notable). BTW in general I don't like to see 2nd, 3rd, 4th AFDs; bus routes seem to be a good target for such, and where they seem kneejerk because they're bus routes, they should be opposed. Ping User:Andrew Davidson who commented in one of the listed previous discussions (the one on bus route 53, commenting about route 53) that "I ordered a copy of The Motorbus in Central London which has now arrived and so I can confirm that it is an excellent source for this historic bus route, containing pages of detail about it. I also see good coverage in other works such as Motor Omnibus Routes in London and the Routemaster Omnibus and so it is clear that the topic passes the WP:GNG. There will be no difficulty in expanding the topic; we just need to get this disruptive discussion terminated so that work can commence. Andrew D. (talk) 05:17, 5 August 2016" Andrew, can you comment about that source re route 5? (Note there was a lot of conflict in the bus route 53 AFD about selective notifications / wp:CANVAS; here I am just pinging the one person I notice in the previous AFDs who went ahead and bought one of the prominent candidates for significant sources.) --Doncram (talk,contribs)
What made you think it was a good idea to ping someone who's literally topic banned from AfD??? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Trainsandotherthings, I don't know about that. I explained why I pinged them. Now, I don't know the terms of whatever ban you refer to, and/or whether they could provide information directly or indirectly. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 18:57, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now you're just being willfully ignorant. I spelled it out for you, Andrew Davidson is topic banned from AfD. I don't know how much clearer I can be. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of bus routes in London, based on the results of the source analysis above which doesn't show a GNG pass. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:44, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The source analysis is not conclusive, as it notes consulting the sources is needed. I suggested consulting one of the sources just above, and you just point to a difficulty about that. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 18:57, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The source analysis shows far more than you have (nothing). I don't know what "and you just point to a difficulty about that" is supposed to mean, but I never said anything of the sort. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:30, 15 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Multiple editors are not convinced by the sources brought forward. Randykitty (talk) 13:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Star Base Football Club[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

The club clearly does not meet WP:NTEAM and WP:GNG. They're not participating in any level of Nigerian League either professional or semi-professional. The claim of Fusion Football Championship being a league is false, the tournament is hosted by the local FA and definitely not enough coverage for a page. Jamiebuba (talk) 17:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Nigeria. Jamiebuba (talk) 17:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it is important to note that this team do not have a page because of the league they play in but the competition they have participated in and the coverage they have received. Felixdgreat (talk) 23:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We have gone through this some two years ago and it was shown that this team has received some level of coverage, plus they have participated in the preliminary round of the National Cup in the last couple of years. Felixdgreat (talk) 08:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Felixdgreat, Please explain what you mean by "National Cup", again if the league itself was notable and semi-professional as you claim then it would have a page as it would have met WP:N. The sourcing of this article heavily relies on Sports247. From what I understand from a check, it doesn't have any editorial oversight. Jamiebuba (talk) 01:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jamiebuba, except it has been updated, one of the criteria to show notability is when the club has participated in the National Cup or its preliminary rounds, and Star Base and most of the other clubs in the Fusion Championship have played in it. In fact, a team from that the Fusion Championship won the Lagos State FA Cup and represented the state at the Aiteo Cup. As for the Fusion Championship, I think it's eligible to have a page as teams that participate in it play in the preliminary round of the National Cup. But at this point, I am exhausted, so, if other editors agree it doesn't pass the notability test, then go ahead and delete. Felixdgreat (talk) 17:20, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG, ORG. There are no IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Source eval:

Database record >> 1. "StarBase FC". www.finelib.com. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
Interview, game news >> 2. ^ Okugbe, Jerry (29 August 2021). "Fusion Football Championship: 'We Were The Better Team' - Starbase FC's Ibrahim Agoro Says After Netting Brace In Win Over GSC FC". Latest Sports and Football News in Nigeria | Sports247. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
Routine game news >> 3. ^ Bamisebi, Samuel (30 July 2021). "Eguavoen Goal Not Enough To Save Starbase FC From Huge Loss". Latest Sports and Football News in Nigeria | Sports247. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
Database record >> 4. ^ "StarBase FC". Nigeria Football Teams. Nigeria Football Teams. Retrieved 22 May 2020.
Routine team news >> 5. ^ Adeniji, Tosin (9 September 2020). "Starbase Football Club Appoints New Head Coach". Latest Sports and Football News in Nigeria | Sports247. Retrieved 28 September 2020.
Routine game news >> 6. ^ Okugbe, Jerry (8 July 2021). "Fusion Football Championship: Starbase FC Coach Olu Akinfolarin 'Not Happy' Despite 4-3 Win Over North York FC". Latest Sports and Football News in Nigeria | Sports247. Retrieved 26 January 2022.

BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV, game news, database, promo. // Timothy :: talk 06:04, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:31, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep playing national cup, and with media coverage like this; one editor above dismisses this as routine - but there's no justification for that - scores and brief match reports are routine. Full blown articles about major hirings meet GNG. Nfitz (talk) 05:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete [6] has a few sentences about the club, but does look like it may be a re-hashed press release, due to NPOV language such as hence the appointment of Olu as the new man to thinker the team. Doesn't look to be any other significant coverage, which WP:THREE sources could be used to show that they meet WP:GNG? Joseph2302 (talk) 10:06, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per Felixdgreat and Nfitz. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 03:14, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 10:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are three half-decent sources, but that appears to be the extent of coverage. SWinxy (talk) 20:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per source analysis by Timothy. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:54, 13 May 2023 (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.

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 no consensus‎. Some of the keep !votes can be discounted, but even if I do that, there's still a straightforward disagreement about whether GNG-satisfying sources exist. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:03, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Ukraine, Bern[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Believe it Dosen't meet notiblity requirements under WP:GNG 1keyhole (talk) 19:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Switzerland, and Ukraine. Shellwood (talk) 19:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Embasies are all notable as are all important missions as are a showing of international relations, just because you dont think its notible doesnt meet threshold for removal Popeter45 (talk) 23:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Embassies are not inherently notable. They need to satisfy GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Embasies are all notable. Kholodovsky (talk) 07:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No they're not. Some have been deleted, many have been redirected. LibStar (talk) 07:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete Embassies are definitely not inherently notable. This article fails GNG and is simply a list of ambassadors if anything, material should be moved to a List of ambassadors article. LibStar (talk) 07:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:54, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:IAR and our pillars WP:5P5. If embassies are not inherently notable they should be. WP:PRESERVE Lightburst (talk) 18:23, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They're not inherently notable. Some have been deleted, many have been redirected. WP:PRESERVE is an editing policy. The relevant policy is WP:N. LibStar (talk) 23:33, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant editing policy was cited WP:PRESERVE Try to fix problems, not delete. Lightburst (talk) 18:25, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are more sources in the Ukrainian version of the article. Also, WP:IAR applies. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not because embassies are automatically notable, (they are presumed notable, but if there are no sources you still can't write the article!) but because there do seem to be enough sources out there in this case to meet GNG. There's another source linked in the dutch version for the opening date in German that can be added. The WP:IAR and WP5 !votes should be ignored as a blatant case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT--Licks-rocks (talk) 09:19, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Licks-rocks: why should my ivote be ignored? I have ivoted the opposite of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Lightburst (talk) 18:25, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah you're right. I was using it as shorthand for WP:ATA. I should've just pointed there. There are several options there that I think apply better (just a policy for one), but to summarise my point, I think just saying "AIR applies" is completely meaningless, and it does boil down to just saying "i like it, so damn the rules, I want to keep it around". If you want me to take an argument involving IAR seriously, you'll need to come up with a very good reason why following the rules would lead to undesirable outcomes here, and I'm not seeing any people here doing that.

PS:the opposite of WP:IDONTLIKEIT is WP:ILIKEIT, and it is directly above the former in the list of arguments to avoid. --Licks-rocks (talk) 20:16, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Licks-rocks: I want to mention that IAR is policy and GNG is only a guideline. Many editors cite essays in AfD. My order of importance regarding AfD is policy, guideline, essay. Lightburst (talk) 20:42, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, by your logic Wikipedia has basically no rules and is complete anarchy, as IAR means that all policies are effectively invalid. You're basically the Wikipedia equivalent of a sovereign citizen. (Personal attack removed) Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:41, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperbole. I have invoked IAR maybe once in 10 years - Ok I am out. I have already over-participated. Lightburst (talk) 22:49, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 10:29, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 12:01, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maurizio Aquino[edit]

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

I can't find any clear evidence of notability for Aquino in terms of WP:GNG and it doesn't seem to pass WP:SPORTBASIC #5. Nothing much found in a Belgian source search. I found KVK Tienen, which has one sentence about him and is not independent, Nieuwsblad simply confirms that he scored a goal and HBVL is the best of the bunch but is little more than a basic transfer announcement, sources of a similar strength are almost always dismissed as being insufficient for notability at AfD. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Belgium. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:25, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Article fails WP:GNG. Jogurney (talk) 14:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Did not find much coverage other than trivial mentions. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 00:57, 12 May 2023 (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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 12:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heiki Järveveer[edit]

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

Unlike that notable politician for enwiki. Probaby fails WP:SIGCOV. Best hit is [7] Estopedist1 (talk) 08:21, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Estonia. Shellwood (talk) 09:11, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. Low level position in politics. ExRat (talk) 13:56, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 09:00, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was keep‎. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:53, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kiko da Silva[edit]

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

PRODded by BoomboxTestarossa (talk · contribs) with with concern issues not addressed for 18 months or 10+ years. Possibly written by subject or someone close to them. Google search brings up little to suggest this person warrants a standalone article, and there appears to be no critical evaluation of their work., then deprodded by StarTrekker (talk · contribs) for alleged mass PROD, but then reinstated by BoomboxTestarossa. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 15:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Comics and animation, and Spain. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 15:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete issues not addressed for 18 months or 10+ years. Possibly written by subject or someone close to them. Google search brings up little to suggest this person warrants a standalone article, and there appears to be no critical evaluation of their work. Unsure if notability warrants a place on List of Galician people. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 16:21, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep. I can turn up a lot of news articles, but they're all in a language unfamiliar to me. Hiding T 12:40, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ Keep. ~~Fails WP:ARTIST.~~ However, the subject probably meets WP:BASIC. It appears that they were involved in some kind of dispute with a local politician, which was covered multiple times by local media: here, here, here and here. Together with the sources currently in the article, I think the threshold of sigcov in multiple secondary sources might be technically fulfilled. This assumes that Galicia Confidencial and La Voz de Galicia are both independent of the subject and of each other, which I can't fully evaluate. I am also not convinced by the reliability of these sources; they appear to be small local papers, which often lack real editorial oversight. In a best-case scenario, the coverage on the subject just barely meets each of the individual criteria of WP:BASIC: sigcov (arguably yes) in multiple sources that are (probably) reliable and (probably) independent, and which do not all cover the same event WP:BIO1E. I'm not quite convinced on an intuitive level, but I think it might be enough for the criteria. Actualcpscm (talk) 12:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have reworked the article to include some of the above-mentioend content. My judgement remains the same, though. Actualcpscm (talk) 12:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Updated judgement after additional sources have been found. Actualcpscm (talk) 00:47, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:14, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It is evident that the article needs a lot of work, but I see enough coverage to meet the notability criteria. Found a few more sources in the regional media: [1], [2], and [3]. Institutional coverage of local events: [4]. An online publication dedicated to art: [5]. And a research article focused on da Silva's work: [6].

More sources: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13]. Alan Islas (talk) 01:17, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion on the sources presented above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Although a few of the sources brought up by Alan Islas are permanently dead, other do seem to meet the requirements in WP:GNG. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 15:58, 12 May 2023 (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.

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 redirect‎ to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. ✗plicit 12:03, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bangabandhu[edit]

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

This is a WP:FORK of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and already covered in target article. Simply his title. Should be a redirect, but that continues to be contested. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 08:36, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Bangladesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, as its relevant contents could easily be covered in the main article. The "Distortion" paragraph does not seem like something to save, given that it is just about a comment made by someone. - Tristan Surtel (talk) 12:35, 7 May 2023 (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.

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 no consensus‎. Given the no consensus is between keeping and merging, and not deleting, it's time to close this after two weeks. Courcelles (talk) 15:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Black Hole Horizon[edit]

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

not noteworthy/notorious enough, the art isnt exhibited anymore, and therefore the page doesnt proving info likely to be helpful to anyone, not even for historical purposes. This page seems like an outdated publicity for the art and the artist Manu de hanoi (talk) 10:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:06, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notability doesn't expire once it's no longer on view. I see more than sufficient sourcing, including how it was the basis for further work when he was at MIT. That said, article does need clean up. Star Mississippi 13:18, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
the "long term collab" with MIT lasted from 2019 to 2020 according to the "schedule" section in the link provided:

https://arts.mit.edu/people/thom-kubli/

are noises + soap bubbles noteworthy ?

https://vimeo.com/121111319?embedded=true&source=video_title&owner=5915740

This could easily be merged with the artist's page, plus the page title creates confusion with a real physical object of the same name (horizon of black holes) Manu de hanoi (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
think @Manu de hanoi is being a bit harsh with the "noises + soap bubbles" comment but agree that the article doesn't seem noteworthy enough and better suited for the artist's page. It's hard to find many external mentions about the sculpture via Google. Jacoblee628 (talk) 17:24, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete oops forgot to do the bolded thing Toobigtokale (talk) 23:03, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but either add a hatnote or a disambiguation page to avoid mixing up with the actual horizon of black holes (event horizon). I added a hatnote for now, we'll see if we should change it to a disambig - although there's no specific page for Event horizon of a black hole. Chaotic Enby (talk) 20:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge artist's work to artist's WP page. Note that most of the links here are to an exhibit in which this artist was one of many. This means that there is little that is substantial or specific to the work of Kubli in the sources in this article. Lamona (talk) 04:05, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Thom Kubli page. Fails GNG, Unneeded CFORK. // Timothy :: talk 21:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, a well sourced work of art, and per Star Mississippi. None of the reasons in the good faith nomination are suitable for a deletion discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:06, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:32, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. While there has been some coverage of Bryant there consensus among participating editors is that the coverage is not sufficient to establish notability. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gizelle Bryant[edit]

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

Non-notable television personality and possible COI. None of the sources cited satisfy WP:GNG, and a search finds nothing better. Bosecovey (talk) 21:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Over at Talk:Gizelle Bryant, prolific sockpuppeteer Davinia Priscilla says, "I paid for a page to be created" (implicitly, this article). --Yamla (talk) 21:09, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 22:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Television, and Maryland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Sources within article do not substantiate any claim to notability MaxnaCarta (talk) 23:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Keep - a quick name search returns alot of credible sources and coverage. I think she passes the notability but the claim on talk page of a possible COI is of concern. I read that she was scammed. MaxxyOswald (talk) 20:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC) — MaxxyOswald (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Can you please list these credible sources and associated coverage? Also, COI is not on its face a ground for deletion. Notability is key because that is the one thing that no amount of editing can overcome. I do not see how notability is established at all and I'd like to see what significant coverage you found of the subject in reliable sources? Best coverage I can find is from the Daily Mail and per WP:RSPUSE: the Daily Mail should not be used for determining notability, nor should it be used as a source in articles MaxnaCarta (talk) 06:55, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A leading character on a widely-watched television show. Ongoing subject of news coverage from the entertainment sector. Sued by Eminem 1, discussion of the show in The Washington Post 2, 3, 4, about her divorce and dating life on ET 5, about her "award-winning novel" 6 -- Jaireeodell (talk) 22:10, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This 'character' is a real person; let's not perjure anyone like this. Nate • (chatter) 23:26, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reminder. True. People sometimes have roles where they play a character of the same name and (mostly?) persona, like The Colbert Report. But yes, Gizelle is a real person and I do not mean to minimize that. -- Jaireeodell (talk) 13:59, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per suggestions made by Jaireeodell and additional sources I found through a simple Google search. Carbrera (talk) 23:25, 24 April 2023 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:19, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All I can find are the typical celebrity fluff articles in People and those types of magazines. She's gotten some coverage for some controversial comments, nothing we can use to build an article.

Oaktree b (talk) 14:55, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per arguments by Jaireeodell. ZuluKingJoshua (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The coverage is totally routine in nature. MaxnaCarta (talk) 12:50, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable enough for a stand-alone article. Most coverage only deals with her in relation to the show she appears on. What is relevant can be used in The Real Housewives of Potomac. I found no indication that the book award she won has any kind of importance and the only book "review" I found just makes fun of her book. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 03:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:29, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 12:06, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

La Marea Academy[edit]

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

nothing notable about that school (WP:SCH) BoraVoro (talk) 08:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Philippines. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NSCHOOL. ThisIsSeanJ (talk) 05:40, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NSCHOOL, only 2 gnews hits. LibStar (talk) 02:27, 11 May 2023 (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.

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 no consensus‎. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:41, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mannemerak[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Manemarak

Articles for deletion/Mannemerak

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

Does not appear to be notable, nothing found in a BEFORE. Tagged for notability since 2019. Previous AfD was no consensus. Lets decide once and for all if this article should stay or be deleted. DonaldD23 talk to me 12:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Entertainment, and South Africa. DonaldD23 talk to me 12:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,

Could you link to the specific notability requirements for articles about TV shows? I saw it before but now I cannot find it :) NeilenMarais (talk) 16:19, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, it is linked from the article itself, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(television)#Television_pilots,_future_series_or_seasons,_and_unreleased_series

I'll take a look. I can confirm from memory that this was publicly released show that aired on South African public television in the 1980's and 1990's.

Would the article qualify for notability if reliable sources proving that it was aired are cited?

I don't know if it qualifies, but some episodes are available on youtube, e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RH6x32WEm4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh6zNYo-5tY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5eRzSyGdvk NeilenMarais (talk) 16:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- In the news: https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2016-09-13--the-big-read-the-pancakes-that-colonised-our-brains/

- In a master's thesis: http://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/80289

— StefanVanDerWalt (talk) 19:59, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mannemarak is a memorable part of many South Africans' youth. I don't know if that qualifies it for "notability", but I for one appreciate this piece of "lore" being preserved on Wikipedia.

A nice addition to the page would be the lyrics to the theme song. StefanVanDerWalt (talk) 15:50, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lyrics are usually a copyrighted work. See WP:LYRICS. – The Grid (talk) 20:22, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, thanks for the reminder. — StefanVanDerWalt (talk) 15:40, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/Commment Meets WP:NTVNATL. Ran for years on the national broadcaster in South Africa (original and repeats), when there was a very limited selection of alternative entertainment. This was a popular TV show in 80's South Africa, and then rerun. Led to merchandising [8] Found this mention in a WP:RS [9]and less reliable sources: [10] [11][12]. Park3r (talk) 01:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:36, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting one more time in the hope of avoiding a second low-participation no consensus closure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:21, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Most of the participants here seem to be arguing for a keep (NeilenMarais, StefanVanDerWalt). They may not be familiar with the AfD process, so aren't putting in explicit keep votes. Park3r (talk) 13:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NTVNATL However, the presence or absence of reliable sources is more definitive than the geographic range of the program's audience alone. and there's no reliable sourcing bar a passing mention. Forum posts and Pinterest are of no use. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 18:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there were other sources including an academic paper and an article in the Sunday Times, which is an WP:RS. It’s well established by the sources that this was broadcast on South African national television for an extended period and this is confirmed by one or more WP:RS. The fact that it was merchandised is offered further evidence that it was broadcast on national television for the purposes of this debate, not as a source in itself. UPDATE: There are TV schedules in Google Books for 1997 from Drum Magazine (a WP:RS) indicating that it aired on SABC. Park3r (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - One problem with finding sources is the spelling of the name, which sadly was an issue last time and pointed out. Spelling is actually "Mannemarak", previous discussion the name was "Manemarak", current article is Mannemerak. Wouldn't hurt if anyone had access to any Afrikaans newspaper archives. WikiVirusC^(talk) 23:42, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete. After sockpuppets and low-participation editor opinions are discounted, what remains is a policy-based consensus that the subject falls short of demonstrating encyclopedic notability. No prejudice against restoring to draft if someone wants to make a further effort to build an article on this subject. BD2412 T 01:19, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cemal Polat[edit]

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

Reads like a resume. He seems to have done lots of stuff, but I cannot see anything that passes WP:NBIO. The only interesting thing is the award, but I cannot find anything about Gazette readers awards. Even if I could, it would be a long way from helping him reach the notable level. The best we could do is draftify the article. Aintabli (talk) 04:45, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Turkey. Aintabli (talk) 04:45, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Cearly passing WP:NBIO There is significant coverage in news press without PR or branded content: See Dunya News (Media TV channel, Pakistan's top 2nd), Best-selling Book author mentioned in-depth by Daily Times (Pakistan's 3rd largest newspaper), also mentioned in E newspaper so passing the notability. He runs some hotels as well and also his restaurant received an award from 'Hackney Gazzette' which is a notable publication in the UK.

London's Kurdish community pulls together to help... | Rudaw.net

Overcoming economic obstacles in Pakistan through entrepreneurial literature (mmnews.tv)

Cemal Polat: Danışmanlık akademisi için hazırlanıyor - Ekonomi Haberleri (sabah.com.tr)

Trakya’daki ‘çayır tırtılı’ istilası hem üreticiyi hem tüketiciyi etkileyecek (cumhuriyet.com.tr)

~~Stoke Newington eatery voted favourite café by Gazette readers | Hackney Gazette IntelisMust (talk) 09:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)~~ [reply]

Also Cemal is being featured in English and Turkish newspaper and the claims are made by the papers about best-selling author and received an award of fav restaurant.

Daily Times Epaper (review section) 02-03-2023 - Daily Times

The below two turkish newspaper has also featured him as an author, both are notable Turkish website.

Sevdiğin İşi Yap, Yaptığın İşi Sev - Esquire

Başarının İzinde (gq.com.tr)

~~Also he is featured in Fashion magazine of EMEA Tribune as a notable news agency. IntelisMust (talk) 09:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)~~<--Confirmed sockpuppet, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Devoter. Aintabli (talk) 02:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Pure PR piece. Most of the Turkish sources in the article are interviews, which are primary sources. They just lay a foundation to promote this person's books and socials that are likely paid-for since they read obviously promotional. Considering the other creations of this user are in a similar condition I have severe UPE/COI concerns here. ~Styyx^Talk? 14:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
..."comment" Hello how it is pure PR piece sir? as per Hackney Gazette his restaurant received the award, this is by editor. None of the articles are paid and nothing mentioned as the paid. Daily Times, Dunya News are reputable news agencies, news paper and you can not blame it for paid as it is published by AFP in Dunya News. IntelisMust (talk) 15:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)<--Confirmed sockpuppet, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Devoter. Aintabli (talk) 02:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not all people who won a so-called "award" are notable, because not all awards are important and notable enough. Aintabli (talk) 15:41, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~So which awards are notable, explain please? restaurant award are notable i.e Hackney's 2021 Hospitality Heroes for National Hospitality Day, this award is notable as per; and many others.~~

Hospitality Day: Barking and Dagenham's favourite cafe, pub and restaurant revealed | Barking and Dagenham Post

The votes are in: Winners of Hospitality Heroes poll revealed | East London Advertiser

Vote: Tell us your favourite pub, cafe and restaurant in Hackney | Ham & High (hamhigh.co.uk)

~~Hospitality Day 2021: Vote for your favourite east London venues | Romford Recorder IntelisMust (talk) 17:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)~~<--Confirmed sockpuppet, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Devoter. Aintabli (talk) 02:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a challenge to establish the notability of the award itself. There is neither an argument here, a Wiki page for the awards, nor any results when I try to search about "Gazette readers." It's crucial to note that notability standards of Wikipedia are much higher. This is getting a bit repetitive, but you might also want to check past AfD discussions, because I'm pretty sure I have seen deleted articles about more notable people. On the other hand, I am questioning some stuff here given your reaction. It doesn't add up with someone who when [they] see the news in TV, decided to write a page about him, according to your comments on my talk page. I'm just saying. It would be important to clear that up instead of spamming links, because they are unnecessarily occupying space. Aintabli (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yaw he he 2A00:23C6:5301:2901:DE2:9BE:52D6:B035 (talk) 16:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Who are you? This is even more mysterious, since "yaw he he" is a phrase used in Turkish to dismiss an opinion. This IP clearly belongs to a native Turkish-speaker from London. Maybe Cemal Polat himself? Aintabli (talk) 17:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 04:09, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Seems to meet WP:GNG. Although the publications are unknown to me, they appear to be legit as at least these 2 have are good Sabah and Dunya News.Hkkingg (talk) 06:24, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can't see anything that passes WP:ANYBIO. There isn't a well-known award won, widely-recognized "contribution", and no entries in a standard national biographical dictionary. I don't know how Sabah and Dunya News are "good". Getting mentioned in two, three, whatever news sites is not enough to establish notability. Even Dunya News discusses "numerous entrepreneurs", one of which is this guy. Now, are all those other businesspeople notable? Wikipedia isn't some sort of a magazine and promotional site for such people. Aintabli (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep met the general notability guidelines of Wikipedia, there are many pages on Wikipedia that have 2-3 references and they have also a Wikipedia so references are not matter but the publications are. Daily Times has a Wikipedia page here and it's Pakistan's one of the few news outlets. Dunya News and Sabah are also notable, as they both sites have depth written about the person. Upon Googling I found 'Hackney Gazette' have written detail about his restaurant and won the restaurant's fav award/votes.

~~https://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/things-to-do/food-reviews/23011755.stoke-newington-eatery-voted-favourite-cafe-gazette-readers/~~

ABC Turkey Gazette has some mentioned about him so this reference would be good as the secondary reference. https://abcgazetesi.com/cemal-polat-dunyanin-en-iyi-danismanlari-arasinda-407045 Hukumat Namanzoor (talk) 08:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)<--Confirmed sockpuppet, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Devoter. Aintabli (talk) 02:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — Some clear sock/meatpuppetry going on here. ~Styyx^Talk? 11:03, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So you decide to turn the discussion into a puppetry by your condescending remarks, surely you have a personal agenda against this individual, you have made your point and others are making their points of views known and there will be a final decision at the end. I would recommend you keep your arguments respectful and within the bounds of Wikipedia rules if you believe there is any reason to delete this page you have every right to make it known and allow for others to note their views too without being attacked or talked down to like this. 2A00:23C6:5301:2901:A010:F348:944B:87DA (talk) 14:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing disrespectful here. The circumstances are fishy at best, which you, an IP replying in a timely manner, are contributing to. Aintabli (talk) 18:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Relies exclusively on trivial mentions and promotional contents, and searching did not yield any better sources either. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 19:43, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Some articles should be improved but passing the notability because 4 websites are purely notable and doesn't have any mention but in detailed in-depth, so the page should not be deleted but should be improved with Turkish references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaikha Habiba (talk • contribs) 08:23, 14 May 2023 (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.

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 no consensus‎. Courcelles (talk) 14:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Děčín Weir[edit]

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

Per WP:FUTURE. All sources used are outdated, 12+ years old. The construction of the project is very uncertain, possible completion is far away. Imho at this stage it is very early for the structure to have its own page. FromCzech (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment, Transportation, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Wikipedia does not restrict itself purely to sources within the last 12 years. And neither is this article about WP:CRYSTAL or WP:RUMOUR but about an ongoing project on a major European river. And if you bothered to look at the German article you'd see there are many more links, the latest dated 2020. The international controversy over the project - which has grown since the article was written - rolls on and on and is sufficient to make it easily notable. What it needs is updating and expanding, not scrapping. Bermicourt (talk) 13:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's the problem – the project is not ongoing. The only step was the development of an EIA study, which is now invalid and a new EIA study must be prepared. The project does not have clear funding and it is possible that there will be no money for it. There is no timetable for when construction should begin or be completed. I didn't find any sources from 2020 on dewiki, I only see a presentation from 2016 that cites sources 12+ years old. As for the international controversy, half of it is unsourced and the other half contains old opinions that may not reflect the current opinions. FromCzech (talk) 13:30, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:52, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The German Wiki article states that "At the end of 2019, the Czech Ministry of the Environment (Czech: Ministerstvo životního prostředí) informed the German Directorate-General for Waterways and Shipping that the environmental impact assessment procedure had ended.[9]" Meanwhile there are up to date articles on the project that also suggest it's still ongoing, but its future is in doubt e.g. under the headline "CONTROVERSIAL DECIN WEIR: WILL THE MILLION PROJECT FINALLY FAIL DUE TO PROTECTED FLOWERS?" the German news agency tag24 said only last October (2022) that "for years, the Czech Republic has been planning the construction of the Decin barrage, which is supposed to improve the navigability of the Elbe and guarantee a depth of 1.40 m on 345 days/year...[but] the construction of the barrage is a long way off. Missed deadlines and the lack of an approved environmental impact assessment delayed the start of construction. Now the 200 million euro project is even further away. Wild flowers could cause a further delay... "We have already selected locations for it," RVC boss Lubomir Fojtu told Czech media. Problem: The Ministry of the Environment must be shown that the intended flowers and other protected plants are viable in the selected locations. Fojtu estimates it could take 5 years to prove that..."

So this major project is still being pursued by Czechia, but environmental concerns look likely to delay or cancel it. That would be a major embarrassment and make it even more notable than it already is. Bermicourt (talk) 14:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:52, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 04:08, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The references being 12 years old is of no import. The article needs updating, on whether it is defunct or ongoing, but many article are in need of updating. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 17:44, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Closing and not relisting, because I'd have called this a week ago. Courcelles (talk) 14:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blackcircles[edit]

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

Unsourced, numerous COI edits. No inherent notability, cannot determine if they have had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture or society. Article reads as mainly promotional and fails WP:NCORP. The only notable event perhaps is being purchased by Michelin, but notability is not inherited. Equine-man (talk) 13:43, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Equine-man (talk) 13:43, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 13:57, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete PROMO, nothing found for the company in RS. Oaktree b (talk) 14:45, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Canadian website for them is owned by a company from Montreal and says they're a Canadian company, appears unrelated to this outfit. Oaktree b (talk) 14:48, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Blackcircles operates a Franchise model in international countries like Canada so while the company is operated by a franchisee in each country the business and brand are linked to the UK company. 2A02:C7C:D07D:D900:5C50:C099:2C6A:7C2F (talk) 08:36, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So it's not helping with the notability factor. Selling tires could be notable, but we need discussions about it in acceptable sources. Oaktree b (talk) 15:51, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the company's claim to have over 2,500 garages in England. The promotional editing needs to be stopped, perhaps with page protection, and possible topic bans of the COI accounts. 76.119.253.82 (talk) 08:55, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that claim is the garages do not belong to blackcircles. As per their own website [13]https://www.blackcircles.com/garages, the garages are “independently owned garages”. Equine-man (talk) 09:19, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I only found one independent source (Telegraph) that might support notability. The rest were advertisements or routine company announcements. Lamona (talk) 03:39, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 04:05, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 02:25, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lin Jian Hui[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:SINGER. LibStar (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No evidence of notability whatsoever I could find; sources in article are a routine mention of a concert and an archived page whose only content reads "Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!". Probably eligible for A7. Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 03:04, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Malaysia. AllyD (talk) 05:10, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Searching for 林健辉 / Lin Jian Hui / Eric Lim (and distinguishing other performers using that name) finds recordings and occasional return appearances in Astro Star Quest in 2001-10 and perhaps more recently an appearance in an "Original Sin" show. Any notability would seem to rest on whether Astro Star Quest is sufficient for WP:MUSICBIO criterion 9; in the absence of sustained subsequent coverage I am inclined to say it isn't. AllyD (talk) 06:26, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. Maybe someday, but consensus is that this person is not currently notable enough for a BLP. Courcelles (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mindaugas Vaitkūnas[edit]

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

Doesn't meet WP:NMMA and regional grappling competitions and some local press are not enough to satisfy notability. Nswix (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Martial arts and Lithuania. Nswix (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nominator.DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 23:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't delete, This page has many references and he has won many medals. He is discussed in many notable articles. I think it should remain on wikipedia. 89.146.4.167 (talk) 08:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

:Please don't delete, This page has many references and he has won many medals. He is discussed in many notable articles. I think it should remain on wikipedia. 89.146.4.167 (talk) 08:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC) Strike duplicate vote. Cullen328 (talk) 06:11, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete He doesn't appear to meet any WP notability criteria. His championships were in youth divisions at a minor federation's European tournament where his competitors were all from Lithuania in very small divisions. Junior ROTC awards also do not show notability nor does he pass WP:NMMA. The coverage appears to be routine sports reporting of results and fight announcements. Papaursa (talk) 16:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't be deleted since International Grappling Federal is an international competition (that takes place in Lithuania). The page is also well referenced and he is discussed in many articles. CedSev78 (talk) 22:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)— CedSev78 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

KEEP: I am Mr. Mindaugas Vaitkunas legal representative and I believe that Mr. Mindaugas Vaitkunas' profile should not be deleted since International Grappling Federal is an international, worldwide competition (that takes place in Lithuania), where Mindaugas Vaitkunas took second place in 2018 [14]. Therefore, even if Mr. Vaitkunas were not a notable figure in Mixed Marital Arts, he still meets the criteria of being a notable grappler by finishing second in a worldwide international competition, the International Grappling Federation World Grappling Championship.

Additionally, the articles in which Mr. Mindaugas Vaitkunas is referenced are not mainly fight announcements, but reference interviews that he conducted, fight outcomes, and Mr. Vaitkunas' achievements in grappling and mixed martial arts. CedSev78 (talk) 00:38, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Vaitkunas is notable based on his coverage and the competitions that he's taken part in, and also won on a number of occasions. His championship wins and extensive coverage in reliable Lithuanian sources demonstrate that. There are a lot of mentions in Lithuanian sources that are reliable. He is the winner of Absolute Championship and the European Grappling Championship, both notable events. He also fought in the King of the Cage and Gladiator Challenge MMA Organizations and he has an undefeated record. Additionally, he has competed in world championships and achieved second place in the male-adult division. Also, the International Grappling Federation, in which he has competed, is a major organization in Europe. All these factors contribute to his overall notability. Therefore, the article should be kept. Margareta00 (talk) 02:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He's fought in a couple of regional grappling tournaments and had nothing but questionable MMA bouts (all against fighters with 0-1 records). He has no reliable coverage outside of statistics and some local coverage. Nswix (talk) 03:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An event which has a median number of 3 competitors per division (and only one had more than 6) is not considered a major event. 95 of the 129 competitors (about 74%) went home with medals. Papaursa (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He has multiple authentic coverages on him as of the article reference section. He also gained the second place on 2018 WORLD GRAPPLING CHAMPIONCHIP in the Adult(male)(Weight categories - 76 kg.)division. Link here.This is a notable event and securing second place in a World championship game makes him notable to be on Wikipedia. Krisboris (talk) 04:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC)— Krisboris (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete unless any editor can produce evidence of significant coverage in indisputably reliable sources that are entirely independent of the topic. I do not consider participating in grappling in Lithuania to be evidence of notability without much stronger sources. Cullen328 (talk) 06:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The subject may very well become notable as his career in martial arts progresses. I think this is a classic case of WP:TOOSOON. --ARose Wolf 14:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - He's notable, as you can see from his mentions in major Lithuanian media. Here are some links that talk about him:

 https://www.lrytas.lt/sportas/startai/2018/11/26/news/islandas-biggi-tomassonas-neatvyks-i-kaune-vyksiancias-mma-kovos-narve-patyre-trauma-8360836

 http://www.old.sportas.info/naujienos/34370-lietuviai_susislave_pagrindinius_prizus.html

 https://www.visainfo.lt/europos-graplingo-cempionate-lietuviu-pergales-94187

 https://www.delfi.lt/sportas/kitos-sporto-sakos/europos-graplingo-cempionate-lietuviu-benefisas-72417824

I believe that he meets the criteria for notability, so his article shouldn't be deleted. Muagoi (talk) 22:56, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

— Muagoi (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Comment All of these new users need to read WP:N and other basic WP policies. Mere mentions of fight results, or announcements of upcoming fights, does not constitute significant coverage and victories in small minor competitions do not pass any SNG. Please let me know if anyone does post coverage that meets WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 23:30, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But the coverage goes beyond mere announcements and includes information about his achievements, fight outcomes, and references to his interviews.

Additionally as other users have commented above, the grappling championship is notable and he was second in this world championship. Grappling Federation is an international federation. It isn't local. Muagoi (talk) 01:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The only grappling championships Wikipedia, and the vast majority of the grappling community, recognizes as being legitimate world championships are ADCC and IBJJF. This "International Grappling Federation" you posted here, is a listed as a Lithuanian company, that hosts a "world championship" in Lithuania. Nswix (talk) 01:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's just another case of WP:TOOSOON. I don't know if there's enough WP:SIGCOV at all for an article to be made. Does anything meet WP:N? No. -- Wesoree ^{(talk·contribs)} 00:41, 12 May 2023 (UTC) edited 00:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He is a notable athlete from Lithuania. He has some achievements that could make him a notable athlete. Here are some links that might be helpful.

^[1]

Mindaugas Vaitkūnas was unbeatable among nineteen-year-olds at the European grappling championship.

^[2]

He was one of the “King of the Cage ::: Baltic Tour 4” winner

^[3]
^[4]

He placed second in the 2018 WORLD GRAPPLING CHAMPIONSHIP. (Adult male division,76 kg)

^[5]

Kinkordada (talk) 07:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

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.

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 redirect‎ to List of Chad international footballers. ✗plicit 02:28, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Olivier Kalwaye[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Africa. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 11:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Chad international footballers as an WP:ATD; found no WP:SIGCOV in a before, just database entries (which don't count per WP:SPORTBASIC 5). ミラP@Miraclepine 12:17, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above. Ortizesp (talk) 16:31, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Agree, with redirect. Govvy (talk) 10:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect I've moved the article's sole source for this person's name to that list. Jack4576 (talk) 11:32, 10 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 02:27, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gravity Noir[edit]

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

Came across this over at the AfD for the film Ankh, which is also heavily promoted here... Non-notable band. The "charts" used are not any sort of national charts we recognize at wiki (Apple music and N1M, top charts.com) and the rest of the sourcing is in blogs, Imdb and youtube. Not seeing MUSIC or GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 01:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 01:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gsearch goes straight to social media and streaming sites. There is ONE hit in Gnews, talking about the film that's not notable either. Some strange cross-wiki promotional rabbit hole I've fallen down. Oaktree b (talk) 01:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Top charts.com is run by MyTuner. How does Top Charts work? Every day MyTuner gathers a high volume of data about the most played songs on streaming platforms, iTunes downloads and airplay on over 50,000 radio stations on the myTuner platform. They compile all the information available on the different platforms and, based on our algorithms, publish the tops of the most played songs by country and music genre.^[6] Does Apple Music contribute to Billboard charts? Currently, the Billboard Hot 100 songs counts streams through on-demand services such as Amazon Music, Apple Music, Spotify and YouTube as being worth more than streams through programmed services like Pandora and Slacker Radio.^[7] Trix18365 (talk) 08:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't classify streaming services as notable, mostly because streams can be bought to boost numbers and they're numbers aren't audited as confirmation. Oaktree b (talk) 11:38, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm in agreement with the nominator. There is almost no independent coverage of this band, despite being active for over 3 decades. None of the alleged awards or charting positions confer notability either. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:42, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Belgian premiere will take place at the end of June. The theater's website provides clear information about the feature film, a performance by Gravity Noir, and even a red carpet moment. I have now omitted this information from the article. This is to avoid giving the impression of advertising. The show is almost completely sold out. We can therefore assume that this will receive the necessary press and media attention. I think it would be premature to have the article removed.^[8] Trix18365 (talk) 16:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We're looking at coverage for the band, a film premiere doesn't add to notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 02:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please have another look. The theater's website clearly states that the film screening will be introduced by a surprise performance by GRAVITY NOIR. In addition, Gravity Noir and Patrick Knight are mentioned several times. Trix18365 (talk) 07:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's a promotional website for the film, related to the subject at hand here. We need third-party sources discussing the band, not an article saying where they've shown up to present something. Oaktree b (talk) 15:15, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Therefore we can assume that this Belgian film première and the live performance of the band presenting its new lead singer will receive the necessary press and media attention (third-party sources discussing the band). Once again, I think it would be premature to have the article removed. Trix18365 (talk) 16:46, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
then we could perhaps drafity it until then, there is no notability otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The film article was deemed non-notable, I doubt it helps notability that this point. "Band guys show up to a place for a thing" isn't notable. If the "thing" (the film) isn't notable, being there as a group doesn't help notability, other than confirming they're a group I suppose. Oaktree b (talk) 20:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.lrytas.lt/sportas/startai/2018/11/26/news/islandas-biggi-tomassonas-neatvyks-i-kaune-vyksiancias-mma-kovos-narve-patyre-trauma-8360836
^ https://web.archive.org/web/20230405173433/https://www.visainfo.lt/europos-graplingo-cempionate-lietuviu-pergales-94187
^ https://www.sportas.lt/naujiena/266907/kotc-baltic-tour-4-gruzinas-uzlauze-k-buslio-ranka-p-zitinevicius-m-bagdonas-ir-e-puidaite-iveike-varzovus-is-uzsienio
^ https://m.kauno.diena.lt/naujienos/sportas/kitos-sporto-sakos/narvuose-kovotoju-aistros-ir-netiketi-rezultatai-891907
^ https://www.grapplingfederation.com/results-web/item/75-world-grappling-championship
^ "About us". top-charts.com. 5 May 2023. Retrieved 5 May 2023.
^ "Billboard is changing how it counts music streams in its charts". dbknews.com. 5 May 2023. Retrieved 5 May 2023.
^ "ANKH - Fakkeltheater". fakkeltheater.be. 20 October 2022. Archived from the original on 7 May 2023. Retrieved 7 May 2023.

Delete, part of a walled garden of (self?-)promotional articles for a non-notable artist and his non-notable band, albums, film, ... Fram (talk) 08:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is a bizarre case of failing sideways for 33 years. First, the band has no biography or reviews at AllMusic ([15]), and even though that site can be sloppy, at least they know when bands deserve coverage. Otherwise, the band has many "awards" but not a single one of them is from a notable ceremony and many are self-promotional scams in which you can pay to be nominated and then tell people you won an award, with a smiley picture from the stage to boot. The band appears in a lot of online sources but those are routinely unreliable hype services and sites that reprint self-promotions. The fact that the band and its management have kept this charade going for so many decades is mind-boggling, but kudos to them if they've made a living. Just keep WP out of it. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:26, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no significant, reliable coverage. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 05:16, 11 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 02:26, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dipteroides[edit]

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

Potential WP:HOAX. No sources found to confirm this exists. ~Kvng (talk) 01:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The identifiers in the article also claim that the name is unaccepted. ✶Mitch 199811✶ 01:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Organisms. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence of this genus name ever existing in this taxon group. This could well have been dealt with by the PROD, BTW.--Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:32, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If WP:PRODDED, it could be readily recreated. Not a great outcome for a hoax. ~Kvng (talk) 13:40, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Since it doesn't seem to actually exist or documented in reliable sources, this would not satisfy WP:NSPECIES. KoA (talk) 14:32, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note, another genus in this family has much of the same story. Should we also try to delete that one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitch199811 (talk • contribs)

Conchodus does appear to be a real, albeit obscure genus.[16] Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added a citation from the Smithsonian on the article. A list of species, and possibly articles for them, could be made. ✶Mitch 199811✶ 02:00, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't find any sources that suggest that this genus actually exists. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:25, 6 May 2023 (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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 03:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ghana Music Awards USA[edit]

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

Non-notable award, I can't find any sort of coverage for it beyond promotional mentions. Oaktree b (talk) 00:31, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Awards, Ghana, and New Jersey. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 5 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 03:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bay Garden[edit]

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

Fails GNG. Some of the citations are advertising, directories, or blogs by the owners. Much of the article is citation-less OR. Grorp (talk) 00:25, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Grorp (talk) 00:25, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~. While I'm not ready to make a !vote recommendation as yet, if this article is kept it will need significant work. To address the significant WP:VER and potential WP:REFBOMB issues. And to remove (or at the very least attribute) the currently uncited and unattributed opinions, unqualified commentary and (at best) quasi-promotional tone. Guliolopez (talk) 10:07, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Guliolopez: I posted some extra notes at Talk:Bay Garden#Notes based on your edit summary questions/ponderings and other comments. Grorp (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. The subject appears to be a private garden that was occasionally open to visitors. And is since closed. While there is some coverage of the subject in mostly specialist sources (irishgardenplantsociety.com), some limited local/property news (Gorey Guardian) and "directory style" entries in tourist publications (Georgina Campbell Guide), I'm not seeing how it rises to the level of SIGCOV. While, in marginal cases like this, I would tend err on the side of a "keep", and while I'm trying not to be, I find myself disquieted by the volume of PROMO, REFBOMBing, and the apparent misrepresentation of sources found in the original creation. While, as noted above, much of this uncited and promotional text could simply be removed, even if we did that, all we'd be left with is a (sub)stub. I therefore can't force myself to advocate a "keep".... Guliolopez (talk) 17:10, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not a notable garden, fails WP:GNG. Spleodrach (talk) 07:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The cited sources are either promitional or trivial mentions. Found no significant coverage that can be used to improve the article. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 22:19, 9 May 2023 (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.

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 no consensus‎. 14 days, nothing resembling consensus either way. Courcelles (talk) 14:53, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Rattia[edit]

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

I'm not finding much coverage of the individual, one television feature and some coverage in LGBTQ press. Unsure of GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 00:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 00:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Photography, Venezuela, and New York. Skynxnex (talk) 03:49, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep decent SIGCOV already presented in sources in article, with LGBTQ and photography press. These sources aren't used as well as they could be. Kingsif (talk) 21:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:TOOSOON? Not sure. I added categories, wikidata, data of birth. Does being in the collection of the High Museum of Art and having a solo show at the Bridgette Mayer Gallery bring this artist to notable? This is right on the edge. The article was created with the comment "Please feel free to edit, add, delete as you see fit, thanks!" and then posted to main space with no categories and as an orphan. Don't want to blame the subject for the editor's bad form but it is a poor starting point for a BLP stub. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep sufficient coverage, works in public collection Hermann Heilner Giebenrath (talk) 18:53, 6 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. This discussion hinges on two issues. First, whether the former Kaplan, current Purdue Global is a "major academic institution". Second, does sourcing exist that allows her to meet NBASIC.

I read the discussion as saying "no", to both questions, and see consensus for a delete close at this time.

That said, terms like "degree mill" are inappropriate here. Per our own article Diploma mill, there is no case to use that pejorative term towards an institution with proper accreditation from the Higher Learning Commission. Courcelles (talk) 14:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Betty Vandenbosch[edit]

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

Inability to establish notability, heavy reliance on primary sourced materials, lack of reliable secondary sources Ushistorygeek (talk) 00:10, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Management, and Canada. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:14, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:15, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: President and Chancellor of a University, satisfies WP:PROF #6. PamD 08:01, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Doubtful that a private for-profit college and an online school are considered a major academic institution satisfactory for NPROF#6. Curbon7 (talk) 12:52, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - in 2018, Purdue University Global was described as "Purdue's newly rebranded version of online Kaplan University" (Journal & Courier opinion) after Purdue buys for-profit Kaplan University for $1, plans to make it public (USAToday, 2017, "Kaplan will continue to run the university, collecting 12.5% of the new school's revenue for 30 years"). The available coverage does not appear to support 'major academic institutions' per WP:NPROF#6. I also found some coverage of Vandenbosch promoting Coursera, e.g. 2021 (CNBC, "Make it" section), 2021 (InsideHigherEd), 2022 (The Hindu), but there does not appear to be independent, in-depth support for WP:BASIC notability and a way to write much more than a CV at this time. Beccaynr (talk) 14:32, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The 2017 USA Today report includes quotes describing Kaplan as "a bottom-feeding operation" (the American Association of State Colleges and Universities’ Barmak Nassirian), and "predatory" ("Bob Shireman, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation, a left-leaning Washington, D.C., think tank"). Beccaynr (talk) 17:33, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree with PamD. This is a university president/CEO of large educational companies. There's a lot of room for interpretation in the phrase "major academic institution" (32,000 students?). This is not the indepth coverage that Beccaynr seeks, but sources should include 1, 2. Jaireeodell (talk) 17:14, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note the individual was President of the private Kaplan University during a period when the organization was owned by for-profit Graham Holdings. Would that quality as "major"? Following the purchase transaction with the Purdue University System she become Chancellor, reporting to a University President. Ushistorygeek (talk) 02:42, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: To me, the "major academic institution" criterion does not refer to how many students an institution has, but the degree of research that occurs at the institution. Institutions classified as R1 and R2, which can be seen by this list, are thus good to go (an exception would be liberal arts institutions like Smith College, which should be assessed differently, but that's tangential). As such, the president/chancellor of a couple of online schools would not satisfy the criterion. Curbon7 (talk) 02:58, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
R1 and R2 are indicators of a university's research activity, but even at many R1's that activity is seldom the measure of the money, hours, and people invested in the students. I agree that R1 and R2 are marks of "major" research universities, but a poor fit for the broader subject of "major" academic institutions. I'm not a fan of for-profit degree mills, but they are large and they are "academic" institutions. -- Jaireeodell (talk) 14:48, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

delete I disagree that we should consider degree mills, regardless of their size, as "major academic institutions." Conferring degrees for $$ is not the same as educational impact. Lamona (talk) 02:45, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Lamona I think we're making adjectives like "major" and "significant" do a lot of work that opens us up to biases based on cultural notions of what is and isn't worthy of notice in higher education. In my reading of WP:PROF #6, the policy is not specific enough to not include a notable university, like Purdue University Global. PUG may or may not be perceived to be a for-profit scam, but it is accredited, it is large, and it does receive support from taxpayers. -- Jaireeodell (talk) 16:48, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jaireeodell, of course we are working with our cultural assumptions. An encyclopedia is about as cultural as you can get. When a policy says "major academic institution" it is asking you to apply what you know in interpreting that. What I know is that I don't consider Purdue/Kaplan a major university, although I could consider it under guidelines for corporations. However, in spite of the institutional questions, the only sources we have about her are press release type announcements as she's gone from one job to another. There are also mentions in articles about an institution or project. This does not add up to notability. If you have any substantial sources, please post. Lamona (talk) 02:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is still debate on whether or not her academic post was at a major academic instittuion and whether or not coverage on this subject represents SIGCOV or are just press releases about job changes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article's own admission that "In 2021, Purdue Global ranked 389th out of 391 schools in the Washington Monthly list of national universities, with a social mobility ranking of 390th out of 391 schools" doesn't add up to "major academic institution". Athel cb (talk) 08:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per meeting WP:PROF #6 as the former president of a "significant accredited college or university." While controversial, Kaplan and Purdue Global are both prominent accredited universities with significant name recognition. She is also the author of a notable book which received multiple scholarly reviews. She doesn't meet WP:AUTHOR for that alone, but I believe it contributes to her notability. TJMSmith (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No matter which way this closes, I feel like there should be a further discussion (RfC?) on what makes an institution "major" for the purposes of #6. Curbon7 (talk) 01:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I totally agree. That would be helpful. TJMSmith (talk) 02:30, 12 May 2023 (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.

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

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 00:50, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Salerno[edit]

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

Appears to be non-notable. Unable to find WP:SIGCOV. Appears to fail WP:NACTOR as all of his roles outside of the Yu-Gi-Oh franchise are minor characters or "additional voices". Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Anime and manga, and United States of America. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:20, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Did not find much coverage of the individual, fails WP:GNG. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 00:30, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not seem to meet WP:NBIO. Not all voice actors (or actors) are notable (WP:NCREATIVE). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I could find no sources to establish notability. Esw01407 (talk) 21:36, 10 May 2023 (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.