Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

10 February 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< February 09	February 11 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Binaytara Foundation Cancer Center

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

Article doesn't meet criteria for organization. Most of the references are about same news of 200 bed expansion. No coverage to describe its notability in neutral and reliable source . Rahmatula786 (talk) 12:30, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:35, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:38, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The argument that "most references are about the same news of a 200-bed expansion" is not valid for an AFD or deletion. References are not exclusively for the title but for supporting the article's content. The article meets the criteria outlined in WP:ORG and satisfies the WP:GNG through secondary, reliable sources. This hospital operates as a non-profit, charity-based organization, focusing on cancer treatment and contributing significantly to society. It clearly meets WP:N guidelines.

(Note: This appears to be a targeted edit. If a user selects random articles for review, it is statistically improbable for the same contributor to repeatedly target multiple articles in a short time span (e.g., minutes or hours). In this case, the contributor initially applied a G11 tag, which was rejected, and immediately escalated to an AFD. Such actions indicate a lack of adherence to Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines. The article has existed for over six months, undergone multiple revisions by various editors, and includes well-sourced, verifiable content. This suggests that the contributor should thoroughly review policies and article sources before taking further actions. The behavior demonstrates intent to enforce personal judgment rather than following established Wikipedia policies.)

Reply to editor:I’d like to clarify that my nomination of the article for deletion was not personal in any way. My concerns about the article stemmed solely from its content and adherence to Wikipedia's notability guidelines for organizations. When I first came across the article, I noticed that it did not appear to meet the criteria for inclusion, and many of the sources cited were repetitive and primarily in Nepali media. This led me to question whether the article met Wikipedia's standards of significant coverage by independent, reliable sources.

I want to emphasize that my intention was never to target you or your contributions. I noticed from your edit history that you have significant experience writing articles, particularly about films, actors, and related topics, which made me curious about your interest in this specific subject. When I saw the draft of the Binay Shah article (who appears to be related to this organization) and its eventual publication, I decided to monitor these articles to ensure compliance with Wikipedia's policies.

I hope you understand that my actions were motivated by a commitment to maintaining Wikipedia’s standards, not by any personal issue. If you feel strongly about the article's inclusion, I encourage you to participate in the deletion discussion and present evidence of notability with reliable, independent sources. The platform is open for all editors to contribute their views, and the decision will ultimately reflect a consensus.

I hope this clears up any misunderstanding. Let’s focus on constructive discussions to ensure Wikipedia remains a reliable and impartial resource.

Best regards,Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CR (talk) 15:09, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the article meets the criteria of significance, although it needs to be revised in accordance with the style of writing encyclopedic articles--Loewstisch (talk) 09:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If there any GNG-compliant sources, it would help to specifically cite them in this AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:41, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Salomea Schweppenhäuser

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

This person is not notable as such, only as a distant relative of the British royal family (WP:NOTINHERITED). Marcelus (talk) 14:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Marcelus (talk) 14:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable by any stretch of the imagination.TheLongTone (talk) 15:38, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to her husband's article or delete, no evidence of notability. —Kusma (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or redirect to her husband's article. I have found that there is coverage in books such as Die vergoldeten Bräute - wie Herrscherhäuser und Finanzimperien entstanden (1981) and Das Kommandierte Wunder - Deutschlands Weg im zwanzigsten Jahrhundert (1959), the index of which indicates that "Schweppenhäuser, Maria Salome" is discussed on 2 pages. Both these only have snippet views on Google Books. This book “Der” letzte deutsche Fürst von Hanau-Lichtenberg Landgraf Ludwig IX. von Hessen-Darmstadt, ein Ahnherr Kaiser Wilhelms II. ein deutsches Fürstenleben (1890), says that Maria Salomea went to Warsaw as an attendant of Princess Caroline, and married after Princess Caroline's death there. The books included in this article are not accessible to me. It is difficult to tell without access to these books how much is written about Maria Salomea and what she did in her life as court attendant, wife, mother and widow. There may also be coverage in Polish, given that she lived in Poland for much of her life. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:11, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RebeccaGreen; She is quite often mentioned in literature because her granddaughter married the Prince of Hesse, and their descendants sat on many royal thrones across Europe. That’s all. In Polish sources, if she appears at all, it is only as the wife of Fryderyk Karol Emanuel Hauke and the progenitor of the distinguished Hauke family. I even checked her obituary in Kurier Warszawski, and she was mentioned only as a widow, a good mother, and a grandmother. She was not a philanthropist, did not engage in social activities—she was a wealthy bourgeois woman like many others, related to many distinguished individuals. Marcelus (talk) 14:54, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcelus It's good to know that her obituary has been seen. However, if there were significant coverage of her, for whatever reason, then she could meet WP:GNG. I don't see that it matters if she received coverage because of her royal descendants - if people wrote enough about her, that's all that matters. As I said, I don't know without access to the books, hence my Weak keep or Redirect. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:14, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Ad Dair shooting

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

Non-notable mass murder, WP:NOTNEWS Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, and Saudi Arabia. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Maponga

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

Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of a writer and activist, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for writers or activists. As always, neither writers nor activists are automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass certain specific inclusion criteria supported by WP:GNG-worthy third party coverage about them in real media -- for instance, you don't make a writer notable enough for a Wikipedia article by sourcing his books to themselves as verification that they exist, you make a writer notable enough for a Wikipedia article by sourcing his books to third-party coverage about them (book reviews, etc.) as evidence that they have been externally validated as significant by somebody other than their own publisher.
But three of the eight footnotes here are the books being referenced to themselves on GoodReads or an online bookstore, one more is one of those crap "celebrity net worth" directories that aren't reliable sourcing, and the footnotes that do come from real media are all short blurbs, or articles that just quote him as a provider of soundbite on a topic, rather than substantive or GNG-building coverage.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have much, much better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Zimbabwe. Bearcat (talk) 16:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dell PowerConnect

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

Most of this article’s content is either unsourced or backed by primary sources. It also has two longstanding flags—one for an unencyclopedic how-to/instructional tone and another for insufficient sourcing. These issues highlight its failure to meet Wikipedia’s standards for reliable and verifiable content. Due to the persistent lack of proper sourcing and unresolved flagged issues, I propose that the article be deleted and redirected to Dell Technologies. I am a Dell employee with a clear conflict of interest. This deletion nomination serves as an invitation for independent editors to review and provide their verdict. Thank you! JM with Dell Technologies (talk) 16:20, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Computing. Skynxnex (talk) 17:09, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tourist attractions near Portland, Oregon

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

Prodded by me with "WP:NOTTRAVEL, no sources. Many of these are several hours away from Portland, so if you want to keep this, turn it into a general Oregon tourism page rather than a ridiculous "near Portland, Oregon" day trip travel guide." Prod2 from Bearian with "That's what WikiVoyage is for." Liz deprodded with "Removing PROD tag, I'll see if there are sources". Yes, obviously we could find sources that the Timberline Lodge offers skiing and is 62 miles from Portland, but perhaps I didn't need to note that since filling this with citations would not fix the fundamental problems with this page that would require a full TNT under a different name even under my suggestion to make it a better subarticle of Oregon#Tourism and entertainment or Tourism in Portland, Oregon (even as two items are in Washington). Reywas92^Talk 16:10, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Reywas92^Talk 16:10, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism and Lists. Shellwood (talk) 16:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are no other Wikipedia articles about tourist attractions near (a subjective word) a city, but numerous lists of tourist attractions by populated place. So, just move and rescope the page to List of tourist attractions in Portland, Oregon as an extension of Tourism in Portland, Oregon. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:42, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are zero items here that are in Portland so a rescope would be deleting everything and starting from zero. You are welcome to create a new page listing Portland attractions should a subarticle to that be needed, but that's irrelevant to this article that can be deleted whether you do that or not. Reywas92^Talk 17:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since the article's prose links to Tourism in Portland, Oregon and includes two Portland-specific categories, I was just thinking of a way to preserve the article history. I would be fine with a rescope and rebuild; it would be very quick and easy to do. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Clearly redundant to Tourism in Portland, Oregon, and the Wikivoyage listings. Even with improvements to comply with NOTGUIDE, I don't see why this can't be folded into the Tourism article as a simple table of attractions by visitation numbers (at most). Sounder Bruce 17:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hayes Warner

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

WP:BLP of a musician, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. As always, musicians are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because their music exists, and have to show certain specific markers of achievement supported by WP:GNG-worthy third party coverage about them in reliable sources -- but the only notability claim being attempted here is that she "had breakout success", with absolutely no concrete measures of success (chart positions, awards, etc.) quantified at all to show that she would meet any of the criteria in NMUSIC, and two of the three footnotes are a Q&A interview in which she's answering questions about herself in the first person, and a puff piece in an unreliable music PR blog that isn't support for notability at all.
There's just one acceptable piece of GNG-worthy coverage in a fully reliable source cited here at all -- but even it doesn't really verify any specific achievements that would pass NMUSIC, and just amounts to "emerging musician releases single", so it isn't enough to get her over GNG all by itself if it's all she's got for reliable sourcing.
Just existing isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to achieve something that would pass NMUSIC, or from having to have better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:56, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. Bearcat (talk) 15:56, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For God and Country (Yee book)

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

Fails WP:NBOOK. Coverage such as [1] is not about the book, but about the author. Redirect to the author James Yee as WP:ATD. Longhornsg (talk) 15:34, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Law, Military, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 15:34, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Meh No objection to Merge, but did this even have to come to AfD? Jclemens (talk) 16:22, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lucia Laura Sangenito

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

Not every supercentenarian needs an article. Wikipedia is not the "Guinness Book of World Records." Suggest deleting or redirecting to List of Italian supercentenarians. Junbeesh (talk) 11:03, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Italy. Junbeesh (talk) 11:03, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above. Anktjha (talk) 12:47, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per above, sole claims to notability is her age. Wikishovel (talk) 15:10, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notability whicu has been firmly established by the sources me and the other keep editor have added Wwew345t (talk) 14:12, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I have added a couple of short news items as sources, which should go some way to establish her notability with respect to Wikipedia, and I've moved the grg-supercentenarians.org links - which I would put more in the class of database / stats sites, like Soccerway is to football - to be external links. On the wider, non-Wikipedia, meaning of "notability" I'd say, actually, that to be the oldest living person in a country is not a far-fetched claim to notability. I might do a more focused search against Italian sources to see if there are additional ones that might flesh out the biographical stub a little more. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 16:09, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found a couple of english that help out as well Wwew345t (talk) 14:06, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there is almost nothing in this article however the article was deleted immediately after it was created then put unto afd ID say give the creator some time to build the article up before we rush it into afd. after I added a couple sources I believe the subject now passes GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwew345t (talk • contribs) 13:32, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that not every supercentenarian is notable enough to have an article but as this one is the oldest living person in Italy i feel like we should give people some time to flesh out the article with more sources before suggesting there arent enough to establish notability Wwew345t (talk) 13:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems a ip user has been deleting content in the page most likley to make easier to delete it Wwew345t (talk) 13:35, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have now added another source that makes the article better https://longeviquest.com/2024/06/visiting-italys-second-oldest-resident-113-year-old-lucia-laura-sangenito/ it goes into her life story in great detail so it should help flesh out the article Wwew345t (talk) 13:56, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CR (talk) 14:22, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as suggested. Of course a 'supercentarian' will genereate a certain amount of passing press coverage. This is not the kind of lasting covererage necessary to establish notability.TheLongTone (talk) 15:35, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Its not just "passing coverage" she has bios on both the gerntolgy research group and Longeviquest the two biggest sources when it comes to supercentenarians the sources establish notability Wwew345t (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest doing a WP:BEFORE and count the amount of sources that have covered her Wwew345t (talk) 16:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Run of the mill and niche coverage. This individual is not in any way remarkable apart from having lived a long time.TheLongTone (talk) 16:10, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The coverage spans atleast 4 years of articles thats not exactly "run of the mill" Wwew345t (talk) 19:49, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have also added some sources and info to the article. There is coverage over time (I've so far found some from 2018), and in national newspapers as well as regional and local. She meets WP:GNG. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:55, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also note that the editor Anktjha (1st !vote above) has been identified as a sock and blocked - their !votes on other AfDs have been struck through. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:55, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. -Sunny365days (talk) 16:27, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amir Saeed Iravani

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

WP:BIO1E and WP:NOTNEWS. In all other coverage he's basically just a spokesman. This is Muskcruft. Golikom (talk) 14:02, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Iran. Shellwood (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He serves as Iran's representative to the United Nations. Would you consider Gilad Erdan to be non-notable? Barseghian Lilia (talk) 18:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No I wouldn't. but that's Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFF. Unlike Erdan there are no sources I can find where Iravani not just referred to as making announcements/statements until the pop of stuff about meeting Musk Golikom (talk) 19:06, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as far as right now goes, he's a clear WP:BLP1E. SportingFlyer T·C 03:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ambassadors of nations with populations over 1 million should have an article. Iran has a population of 86,000,000 and the article is about their rep at the UN.Arbeiten8 (talk) 16:09, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's not how it works though - ambassadors typically don't pass GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 17:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ambassadors do not pass WP:NPOL and must meet WP:GNG. It does not appear that sourcing exists more than he exists. --Enos733 (talk) 21:55, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus yet, but "keep" !voters are advised to bring sources to the discussion or show how the subject meets the applicable guidelines.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:27, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ikmal Amry

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

Sources presented for this actor do not show that they meet WP:NACTOR. Thie foreign language Wikipedia article is similar to this and with just about three sources. Before search did not show anything beyond trivial mentions in what look like gossip blogs. Mekomo (talk) 13:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Malaysia. Mekomo (talk) 13:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple source about Ikmal involvement in Malaysian cinema. He already appear in Indonesia TV, thats why i know him and also from Soloz: Game of Life Ryan Nambou (talk) 16:45, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Soloz:_Game_of_Life#Cast_and_characters: and undo the redirect once other significant roles can be added. Not opposed to Keep if other users think he meets WP:NACTOR -Mushy Yank. 17:42, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:25, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Starseed launcher

AfDs for this article:

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

I didn't find any significant coverage of this idea in secondary sources, only several mentions of it. The article is sourced with one primary source and one passing mention. Without additional sources, it appears not notable enough for an article. Artem.G (talk) 14:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Astronomy and Spaceflight. Artem.G (talk) 14:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Buzz (DC Thomson)

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

I redirected based on there being only a database source. This was undone, and a new source (this book) was added. That book comes from an author and publisher who do not seem to be notable as I can barely find any info on either, and the book itself appears to be full of reprinted comics and no valuable prose. There's also little to suggest notability of this subject, nor the few bluelinked strips listed here. This appears to be a subject of very niche interest, and probably not something that would've gotten a ton of coverage. I would stick with the redirect to The Topper (comics). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and United Kingdom. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is a short running comic (not even 2 years starting in 1973) but it was being reprinted (and advertised on the front cover) as part of Classic of the Comics up until 2010. That's near 40 (not continuous) years as part of national publications. I know the source I added isnt the best but its more than just reprinted comics, its a complete index of the Topper comic that Buzz merged into. I'm going to have a look for more sources. Eopsid (talk) 16:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Binay Shah

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

Sources are not neutral, insufficient coverage, promotional tone. Rahmatula786 (talk) 12:37, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nepal. Shellwood (talk) 16:34, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The user initially tagged this article with G11, citing the following reasons: "Bone marrow Transplant centre in Nepal was established in a government hospital (CIVIL) by the Government of Nepal. The editor is trying to promote the individual with misinformation that is not supported by neutral sources. Contributions and career sections are filled with such information." After the G11 tag was rejected, the user immediately took the article to AFD, claiming: "Sources are not neutral, insufficient coverage, promotional tone." These two actions reflect inconsistent reasoning and suggest an attempt to misuse Wikipedia's tools.

Supportive evidence:

The statement about the Bone Marrow Transplant center does not claim it was established by Dr. Binaya Shah. The original sentence in the article states: "Dr. Shah played a pivotal role in establishing Nepal's first Bone Marrow Transplant (BMT) center, which was set up at the Civil Service Hospital................" This is not original research and is clearly supported by the provided reference (reference link which is already given in article - https://www.khasokhas.com/2683#gsc.tab=0).
The user's actions show immediate and differing approaches without valid reasoning. This behavior strongly indicates targeted action rather than random article review. Random reviews rarely involve the same contributor repeatedly targeting the same article and same contributor different article multiple times within a short duration (minutes or hours), further highlighting this as a deliberate search-and-target action.

The article does not violate WP:GNG or WP:BLP guidelines. It meets notability requirements with adequate sourcing, and the content adheres to Wikipedia’s policies. The user should ensure proper evaluation of sources and policies before taking further actions.Endrabcwizart (talk) 09:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 13:53, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dobot Robotics

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

Sources in the article do not show that this company meets WP:NCORP. A before search presented press releases which are not RS. Mekomo (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and China. Mekomo (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Failed the in-depth coverage needed in a page for a corporation. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 19:37, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The entry content and sources have been updated.Iuliusnanus (talk) 14:11, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 13:53, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Electrum Bitcoin Wallet

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

The sources show that the subject is not yet notable for an article Patre23 (talk) 07:43, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency and Companies. Patre23 (talk) 07:43, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, such an article already exists in the German Wiki. This doesn't mean that the Electrum is notable but at least shows a demand for this. I also wish to translate the article to other languages that I know. The point of the article is to have a more neutral information about the critical software.

Even after 16 years since release of Bitcoin there are not so many of wallets available.

The ideal wallet also should be open source, community driven and cross platform. Current options are:

Bitcoin Core (Qt) which downloads the full blockchain, too complicated for most users.

Cake Wallet which is based on Electron and the Electrum which is fully cross platform. It even available in PlayStore and F-Droid.

The Electrum exist since 2011 and very well known. It introduced many innovations like simplified validation, seed phrases and Lighting. It also a base for the official NameCoin wallet.

It's endorsed on the bitcoin.org https://bitcoin.org/en/wallets/desktop/windows/electrum/

Please clarify why you think this software is not important.

I'll try to add more back links. Stokito (talk) 09:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Stokito (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

Keep: Although this article should be rewritten, there is some literature investigating the features and security of Electrum. [2], [3], [4] . Less significant coverage: [5], [6], [7]. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 10:04, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Needs to be significantly rewritten to meet WP:MOS, and needs more sources, but they do exist. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 01:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without actual third-party RS coverage. The book sources may be RSes (Packt is a dubious churn-en-out publisher) but they are only 10- and 11-year-old cites to the notion Electrum is "continuously improving", which would probably require a more recent RS to claim. The rest is non-RSes, primary sources and OR. There's nothing here. Is there any solid third-party RS coverage? Not claims there might tentatively be in the tufure - David Gerard (talk) 09:41, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you can find an RS as an example? I mean, there are not so many books which is probably expected for a software. But else would be good as RS? The first Google page shows many reviews, including a popular CoinMarketCap, ZoneBitcoin etc.

In one video I heard the "Electrum is used for 10% of all Bitcoin transfers" which is a big argument for notability. I didn't found the stats to confirm.

Please note that many users can't find a good and trustworthy sources and starting to use some proprietary wallets with dark patterns. I myself was overwhelmed by amount of them. But also users may found a phishing Electrum clone.

That's why it's so important to have an article about the critical software here.

If there are not enough of recent books that mentions Electrum then this is a not so big reason for deletion of the article as for me. Stokito (talk) 11:09, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Finding RS in the crypto field is tricky, but is possible, e.g. Business Insider calling it the best desktop wallet, an in depth review from Techradar, an in depth review from Money (Money.com). There's also plenty of RS coverage of the attacks on it: ZDNET 2018 ZDNET 2020 Vice. Then there are various bits of academic research discussing different aspects of it: [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]. WP:NSOFTWARE is clearly met. SmartSE (talk) 11:54, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:39, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – One of the most used cryptocurrency wallets. Svartner (talk) 03:02, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please assess whether the sources raised by SmartSE and Helpful Raccoon establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 13:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Both SmartSE and Helpful Raccoon suggest scholarly sources that provide WP:SIGCOV. SmartSE also proposes articles from Money Magazine and ZDNet and a review from TechRadar that can be used to establish notability. (Please note that the second article from ZDNet cannot be considered for WP:RS since it was published after October 2020). I think there's enough here to meet WP:NSOFTWARE.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Al Waab station

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

Redirect to Gold Line (Doha Metro). The only thing approaching WP:SIGCOV I found was this, most of which isn't even specifically about the station in question. JTtheOG (talk) 08:44, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Qatar. JTtheOG (talk) 08:44, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:44, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Station is mentioned on Gulf Times, The Peninsula, and Doha News, certainly enough to meet WP:SIGCOV. Eelipe (talk) 08:18, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

merge to Gold Line (Doha Metro). There's nothing in this article that couldn't be better presented as part of the rather minimal list within the line article, and this appears to be true for the other stations on the line. Mangoe (talk) 13:02, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:40, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nkiru Olumide-Ojo

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

Not a single relialbe independnet source to meet WN ANYBIO or GNG. Generally not notable businesswoman/ columnist. Removed some dead or not related links Cinder painter (talk) 08:03, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:10, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I do not entirely agree that the links that have been removed are unrelated. The article's history shows quite a bit was removed before this was posted in AfD. DaffodilOcean (talk) 18:00, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Why were sources removed? Dead links could be rescued using the wayback machine. Also, sources that shows that her books were reviewed by independent outlets were removed before this nomination. I do not have an opinion on the notability of this topic at this time. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 19:10, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This AfD should be withdrawn so that the sources can be restored. Then resubmit for AfD if needed. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:32, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B1t

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

Fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG. Only sources in article are Navi.gg, ESL, (both of which are not independent of the subject), and HLTV (unreliable per WP:VGRS). A WP:BEFORE search does not find anything of substance either. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 14:29, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Ukraine. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 14:29, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you search Ukrainian language sources? The player is Ukrainian, Counter-strike is pretty big there, so I'd be surprised if there's wasn't some level of coverage since he's been on the roster of two-major winning rosters. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:18, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I've not found any. None of the ones over at the uk-wiki appear that they would hold up to our standards for reliability either. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 15:01, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:49, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found some sources from isport.ua and ua.tribuna.com, but I am unsure if those count for notability. IgelRM (talk) 08:12, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the sources seem to have a staff page nor an editorial policy. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 15:01, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ua.tribuna appears to be one of the publications of tribuna.com, which seems to indicate that it is mainstream enough to be collaborating with the Ukrainian government. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 06:03, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The ua.tribuna is also a blog post. In fact, all of their esports articles are blog posts. There is certainly no editorial standard there. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 14:42, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stromness Primary School

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

This primary school is not notable for an article. Patre23 (talk) 08:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and United Kingdom. Patre23 (talk) 08:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:10, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Schools, including primary schools, should follow WP:NSCHOOL. With that being said, I only found this BBC article. Limmidy (talk) 19:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per WP:HEY, the article should be given time to develop before considering deletion. 1keyhole (talk) 02:29, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what WP:HEY says. Geschichte (talk) 19:59, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unfortunately fails the relevant notability guideline. Geschichte (talk) 19:59, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sergio De La Torre

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

No good coverage can be found, not notable person according to the Wikipedia's general notability guideline Taking off shortly (talk) 08:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Actors and filmmakers, Photography, and California. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Maquilapolis. As an associate professor of art, focused on making and curating art rather than on publishing art scholarship, most criteria of WP:PROF appear out of reach to him, leaving only WP:NARTIST or WP:GNG. But that would require in-depth coverage of him or his works, published independently. Thus, for instance, this news story about one of his projects doesn't count as independent, because it's in the student newspaper of his university. I also found independently published stories quoting him about the greying of the Mission [13] but they don't have the necessary depth of coverage of him. His film appears notable, though, and there is some discussion in that article of his role in creating it, so I think it would make a good redirect target. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:26, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:31, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hermann Kafka

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

Non-notable merchant. The page is all about his family relationships and what he was like, but there is nothing he accomplished. Being a father of a notable person does not make him notable, similar case like Kafka's sister (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabriele Kafka). Redirect to Franz Kafka#Early life could be a reasonable alternative to deletion. FromCzech (talk) 10:54, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 10:54, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article Franz Kafka says that Franz's relationship with his father Hermann had a great deal of influence on his works. Doesn't that count towards Hermann's notability? JIP | Talk 21:38, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Influence on his work is a reason why Hermann should be part of Franz Kafka's article, but it does not make him a notable person for his standalone article. FromCzech (talk) 06:25, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does not make him a notable person for his standalone article. Can you find any standalone articles for relatives of notable people? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:16, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mary Todd Lincoln and I bet spouses of other famous people, even when they are not famous for their own accomplishments. I agree with JIP above. Hermann certainly is relevant to Kafka's Letter to His Father, The Judgment, and other works listed in Hermann Kafka. Also, I see no harm in retaining Hermann Kafka. It's of interest at least to some people who care about Kafka, and it's not as if it's crowding out another article of greater importance. Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:25, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:20, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Darrell Cavens

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

Coverage is mostly focused on Zulily, Cavens lacks notability independent of Zulily. Fails WP:GNG. It would be better if we redirect this to Zulily's article. Gheus (talk) 11:44, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:48, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:19, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pleasant Ridge, Jay County, Indiana

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

All references in the county history are to the Methodist church that stood here until sometime in the 1990s. And frankly, it sounds like a Methodist church name. Mangoe (talk) 13:12, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gah! The auto-fill in the search engines is now going to keep filling in Pleasant Ridge, Jasper County, Indiana (AfD discussion) for me, isn't it? ☺ Uncle G (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well Baker says "village". Going through Jay County, Indiana#Further reading I concur with Mangoe that we only get the single factoid that "the Pleasant Ridge; Methcdist Episcopal" was in Wayne or Bear Creek township (Jay and Montgomery disagreeing on the township). The church turns up as a name+address in the 1940 A Directory of Churches and Religious Organizations in Indiana. The gazetteers and shipping guides turn up a post office of Pleasant Ridge, Greene County, Indiana, but no Pleasant Ridge in Jay at all. The nearest Arcadia Publishing book is about Muncie, and that does not have this. I cannot confirm Baker's claim to there having been a village. There's not enough to support even a good stub, let alone provide scope for expansion. Uncle G (talk) 16:20, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Skynxnex (talk) 17:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noble, Indiana

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

At the moment, a church. I could not find any evidence of a town around it. Mangoe (talk) 12:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amusingly, the de Colange National Gazetteer has a post-village named Hector in Noble Township, Jay County, Indiana, which our article does not. The township and Noble County turn up the gazetteers, but no Noble village in the township, contrary to what Baker claims. The Montgomery and Jay Historys confirm the Hector post office, but have no Noble at all in their histories of Noble Township.
The Lewis Publishing Biographical's entry for Noble Township outright says that Bellfontaine, Indiana (which we have, mis-spelled, as another GNIS mass-import: Bellfountain, Indiana) is "the only village" in Noble Township. (This puts the nail in the coffin for Brice, Indiana (AfD discussion) being a village in Noble Township.) It also says that its post office was named Hector, showing that Hector and Bellfontaine are one subject. The township entry indeed has a Noble Christian Church on section 11.
So, ironically, we have a choice of whether this useless rubbish should redirect to Noble County, Indiana because it's a reasonable truncation of that, or to Noble Township, Jay County, Indiana where the church that this apparently actually is (although I haven't checked where section 11 is), is to be found.
Uncle G (talk) 16:56, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Skynxnex (talk) 17:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joanna Miłosz-Piekarska

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

Fails WP:NAUTHOR. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:16, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Poetry, Poland, and Australia. UtherSRG (talk) 12:16, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Divyesh Savaliya

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

Too promotional COI article written by user:OnixWikiEditor. As the username, the whole article is promotiong Onix Renewable Ltd. i.e, was this necessary? Founded in 2007, Onix Renewable Ltd. has developed several large-scale renewable energy projects, including wind-solar hybrid initiatives. The company has also expanded its solar module manufacturing operations, with its headquarters located in Gujarat, India.. Also none of the references provided are reliable or primary sources. ANU^writes 10:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{Re|ANUwrites}} Thank you for your feedback! I understand the concerns regarding promotional content and COI. I have now removed the following line to maintain neutrality:

"Founded in 2007, Onix Renewable Ltd. has developed several large-scale renewable energy projects, including wind-solar hybrid initiatives. The company has also expanded its solar module manufacturing operations, with its headquarters located in Gujarat, India."

Additionally, I will work on improving the article by adding reliable, independent sources and ensuring a neutral tone. If you have any specific suggestions on how the content should be framed, I would appreciate your input. Your guidance will help ensure the article aligns with Wikipedia’s standards.

Looking forward to your feedback! ~~~~ OnixWikiEditor (talk) 11:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Environment, and Gujarat. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Indian Premier League

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

Only the dates have been announced, WP:TOOSOON and fails WP:SIGCOV for now. Tried redirecting, but others disagree. Vestrian24Bio 10:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Cricket, and India. Vestrian24Bio 10:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Keeler

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

No reliable sources indicating notability in the article. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minus33

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

Not-notable brand with SPA editing issues. Some of the products have shown up in reviews, but finding reliable sources talking about the company itself have proven challenging. SPAs keep trying to use the heritage of the company that Minus33 was spun off from as some kind of legacy status, in what's clearly WP:PROMO (most of the citations to get to that history were basically press releases). SPA sleeper account came out today to revert it back to the old state, which prompted a bit of a dive to see if there's better sourcing so it passes WP:GNG but, frankly, no. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 09:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: this article was actually CSD'd back when it was nominated but an IP that has only edited this article removed the CSD template without comment. diff Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 09:38, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and New Hampshire. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icebreaker_(clothing) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_Inc. for the level of promotional content. The company is 100+ years old with a 5th generation owner and used to be a top 10 textile Mill in the world. You can see this information on PBS here: https://www.pbs.org/video/ashland-jsfnxe/

I can take a swing at taking some of the promotional language out of the post, but it would be easier if the person deleting this article outright could point out some specifics. Lawdog87 (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is a brand new account created today, whose only edit prior to this discussion here was at the page in question, repeating the marketing points that other SPAs have fallen back on.

It’s not a 100 year old company though, that’s marketing screed from the manufacturer trying to claim the history of a legacy manufacturer that (arguably?) spawned them. Local newspapers do not support the claim of being the same company (link) Their own website states

In 2002, Minus33 was created by textile engineers from L. W. Packard & Co. Inc. L. W. Packard has been involved[…]

And then goes on to the history of L. W. Packard like that’s a transferable property of a shuttered company. There’s no RS showing they’re the same company I’ve been able to find.if you could provide any sources that’d go a long way to addressing the WP:GNG issues. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 15:23, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've found some more sources as to the company and their history.

WMUR: Keeping Warm with Minus33 - https://www.wmur.com/article/thursday-january-22nd-minus-33/4970646

NH’s Business: Winter clothing businesses making apparel in wake of “more wet than snowy” winter prediction - https://www.wmur.com/article/new-hampshire-business-segment-12-08-2024/63126487

https://thelaker.com/2021/minus33-keeps-tradition-alive-in-historic-mill Lawdog87 (talk) 15:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of those videos are usable beyond for basic information, as they're both just interviews with employees. Neither interview makes the case that it's the same company, and the third does not make the claim that Minus33 is the historical manufacturer either, but rather has some of the same personnel and facilities. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 15:25, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comfort items

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

Another piece of Guantanamo cruft created by a now-WP:SBAN editor. Fails WP:GNG, as Wikipedia is WP:NOTDICT. ~~Can redirect to Guantanamo Bay detention camp as WP:ATD, but there's really not much there.~~ Longhornsg (talk) 08:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Military, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 08:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. A redirect to anything related to Guantanamo would be inappropriate because a Google search shows that the term is vague and very broad. It is used to describe packages for hospital patients, people imprisoned legally, homeless people, and just little luxuries that people purchase for themselves. Cullen328 (talk) 08:48, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Comfort, maybe? Hyperbolick (talk) 08:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - term is no good as it's vague and not notable. Comfort is way too broad a merger target. Guantanamo Bay detention camp would be possible theoretically but it's not very practical here given the vagueness. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:22, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Internment Serial Number

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

Another piece of Guantanamo cruft created by a now-WP:SBAN editor. Fails WP:GNG, as Wikipedia is WP:NOTDICT. The article is a collection of various WP:PASSING and WP:SYNTH. Longhornsg (talk) 08:15, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Military, Cuba, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 08:15, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing but passing mentions, and anyway, the subject is so narrow I don't see how encyclopedic content could ever be collected. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:14, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opkg

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

This piece of software does not appear to meet WP:GNG/WP:NSOFT. The page was proposed for deletion by HyperAccelerated in March 2024 and subsequently redirected to dpkg; however, the redirect was recently removed by an IP with the rationale: "opkg has nothing in common with dpkg (aside of being a package manager), redirecting to dpkg is confusing". Notability is questionable, so I'm taking to AfD to establish consensus about a better redirect target (if not to delete entirely). Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 07:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Software. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 07:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I notice that ipkg, which opkg is apparently based on, is currently a redirect. If the predecessor software is more notable, it might make sense to restore the ipkg article and redirect opkg to there. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 08:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Racial identity of Sakanoue no Tamuramaro

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

The notability of this WP:FRINGE theory is dubious, and a lot of the article just relies on original research to pad the article with speculation. Propose reducing to what is relevant and just merging to Sakanoue no Tamuramaro. Emm90 (talk) 07:27, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The page is a translation from the Japanese version which maintains the same issues. It has been employed shortly after its translation as part of the wider Yasuke CTOP to make an argument about a specific tangentially related proverb on the Samurai [14] page. As shown by that link, and it being translated alongside the now-deleted page for Alaric Naude (a fringe scholar who began tweeting about it in relation to Yasuke [15]), I believe it is a case of WP:COATRACK.

Relm (talk) 08:58, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Xavion Alford

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

Fails all 5 criteria of WP:NCOLLATH. Longhornsg (talk) 07:04, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, United States of America, Arizona, California, and Texas. Longhornsg (talk) 07:04, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GNG with sources such as [16][17][18][19] Alvaldi (talk) 14:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Singdarin

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

I've lived in Singapore for more than ten years. "Singdarin" is not a thing. Clubette (talk) 05:37, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Clubette (talk) 05:37, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. A quick google scholar search for "Singdarin" comes up with 17 results, and a google search finds only 124 results (with similar results ommited). If Singdarin is a thing, it is safe to assume that the good sources are not in English. Machine translation is pretty useless with this word. Anyone who knows Mandarin, Malay or Tamil might be able to find some better sources.

The sources on this article are also really bad. The word Singdarin is mentioned in almost none of the sources, and when it is, it is used as shorthand for Singaporean Mandarin. Clubspike2 (talk) 06:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Denying the existence of Singdarin is no different to denying that Singlish exists. An overwhelming number of Mandarin-speaking Singaporeans use Singdarin in colloquial speech and I find it peculiar that you have not noticed this despite claiming to have lived in Singapore for a decade—which I suppose its possible, if you had mostly just lived among other expats/immigrants and not interacted much with the locals. Many ethnic Chinese Singaporeans are not known to be particularly fluent in Mandarin as compared to their Chinese/Taiwanese counterparts due to their country's multicultural background as well as their huge immersion in English being their main language, which led to the rise of Singdarin. 175.197.10.59 (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's no secret that Singaporeans mix Mandarin and English, but unlike Singlish, I have never ever heard the term "Singdarin". Clubette (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm leaning towards this definitely exists, but a few more academic sources would serve this article better. JungleEntity (talk) 23:25, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:32, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Colloquial Singaporean Mandarin absolutely exists, but I lived in Singapore for ten years and never heard anybody call it "Singdarin". Also, as it stands, this article is highly duplicative but still contains less information than Singaporean Mandarin. (I'm also less than convinced that we need a separate Standard Singaporean Mandarin article, but that's a different AFD.) Jpatokal (talk) 11:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ravinder Kumar (wrestler)

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

A non-notable priest of a Temple, It was actually a redirect to Ravinder Singh (wrestler) but it is vandalised by User:Ravinderkumarpriest, see [20]. There is Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. The citation Mapping Histories and Kashmiri Pandits are not about this subject as he is a 1994-born and books were published in 2002 and 2001 respectively. The citation 1 is a blogspot website, 2 is a X (Twitter) post and 3 is an official website. Taabii (talk) 06:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Hinduism, India, and Himachal Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 06:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Speedy delete~~: Blatant promotion; qualifies for WP:G11. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the redirect needs to be restored, so I guess I should !vote Redirect. Is there a better way to handle G11-deletable material that overwrites a redirect? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:39, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I came across this last night on NPP and was going to come back to it today, after seeing there was a redirect involved when I went to the talk page and ended up on a different article! (Wanted to wait until I had a clearer head!) Redirect the article, per Helpful Raccoon. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:43, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Taabii,

I was planning to make further changes, including adding news and articles to this, but you have requested its removal without giving any time for discussion. This suggests that you are promoting individuals like Repest and Seril Keler on Wikipedia, and encouraging the misuse of such a reputable and growing platform to rank them on the first page of search results. 182.77.60.22 (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to log in when editing and commenting. Wikipedia does not promote anyone, see WP:NOTPROMO. Articles created for promotional purposes are not appropriate here, and Wikipedia's criteria of who should have an article are stated at WP:Notability. It is unfortunate that you have the same name as a notable criminal, but this is not a problem that Wikipedia can solve. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 22:59, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i admit my mistakes, but I was about to fix them as soon as possible. However, all of you started commenting one after another, pushing for the page to be deleted." Ravinderkumarpriest (talk) 03:42, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has little tolerance for promotional editing. It is strongly discouraged for people to write articles about themselves due to the inherent conflict of interest. You should definitely read WP:Autobiography#Creating an article about yourself. If you still want to write an article about yourself, you should create an article in draftspace and submit it for review, making sure it meets WP:Notability and doesn't read like self-promotion. (The vast majority of people do not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria.) I saw you created Draft:Ravinder Kumar Pandit but didn't include any text. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:41, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it doesn't make sense for someone who isn't a wrestler to have an article titled Ravinder Kumar (wrestler). Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:45, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell where this content can be published on Wikipedia. 182.77.60.22 (talk) 23:45, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT - I feel sorry for my student who was named Jordan Marsh, but he can't make his own Wikipedia article. Right now this article is a chimera of two different living persons' articles, neither of whom is notable. Bearian (talk) 16:15, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok Thanks 182.77.60.22 (talk) 21:14, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect The page was originally a redirect from a move before being hijacked by a self-promoting user. The redirect should be restored. I have reported the hijacking editor at AIV since they are WP:NOTHERE. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I was going to Relist this to Ravinder Singh but when I looked at that article, there is no mention of a "Ravinder Kumar" there, wrestler or otherwise. Are we sure these two people are related and existing?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rangers F.C. 0–1 Queen's Park F.C.

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

Wikipedia is not news website where every match played would have its own article. There is nothing unique in this match to warrant a separate article. Mekomo (talk) 06:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Football, and Scotland. Mekomo (talk) 06:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is as notable as Berwick Rangers F.C. 1-0 Rangers F.C. which has its own page. This was the first time in its history that Rangers lost to a lower league club, at home, in the Scottish Cup. The topic generated wide media coverage and discussion and the details around the match deserve to be preserved in an article for those who will be interested in this match in future. Regards 2A00:23C8:3D81:7801:AD:1CE4:4EAF:9A60 (talk) 07:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I am the editor who started this article but I’m commenting on a different device and hadn’t logged in. sorry. Regards 2A00:23C8:3D81:7801:AD:1CE4:4EAF:9A60 (talk) 07:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First time Rangers have ever lost at home to a lower division club in the Scottish Cup. Does that make it Notable or a cute bit of trivia? Isthisthe sort of thing where we have to wait to see if it has the same sort of cultural reference as the Berwick match? In Vitrio (talk) 08:07, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, regrettably. I think there is a pretty high bar for a separate "upset" article. Remains to be seen if this game has lasting coverage in the way of the Berwick Rangers game. I'm a bit surprised there isn't an article on the "Super Caley" victory against Celtic (2000). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There most definitely should be, it has the lasting coverage. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 12:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete second tier team beating Rangers is unusual but unlikely to have lasting coverage, since second tier teams beating first tier teams in cup matches happens often (e.g. Liverpool lost to Plymouth on the same weekend). I would not expect there to be lasting coverage of this, and if in future there is, then and only then should it be re-created. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:43, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Time will tell whether or not this will get lasting coverage but it's impossible to know right now. Not opposed to draftifying or redirecting but I don't think they are the best solution. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 12:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Not sure why creator would start it if they don't have time to make it decent? To be honest, not sure it would pass WP:GNG at this time, less than a day later. Matches like Berwick have long-term interest, QP match may well be the same but we cannot assess that after so little time. Crowsus (talk) 12:43, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 16:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 16:40, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Kaniut

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

Another piece of Guantanamo cruft created by a now-WP:SBAN editor. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Mid-level military officer who is not notable, with no WP:SIGCOV about Kaniut the person or the military officer. The article is a collection of various WP:PASSING and WP:SYNTH. Longhornsg (talk) 06:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Cuba, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 06:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - it's hard to tell for sure because the sources are almost all dead links, but titles and such suggest that the only one of them which is in-depth on the subject is published by The Wire (JTF-GTMO), i.e., by his employers and thus not third-party. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 06:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The post 9/11 and Guantanamo events that supposedly made him notable occurred about 20 years ago and yet I am unable to find any significant coverage of him in independent sources in Google Books or anywhere else online. Cullen328 (talk) 09:15, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eduant Private Russian School

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

Although the Hürriyet cite is fine I am not sure about the other cites so I doubt this school is notable Chidgk1 (talk) 06:14, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, Russia, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:14, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prodan (disambiguation)

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

WP:TWODABS applies. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 07:34, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That did indeed apply before my edit just now - there's also a village, but we previously had the link to that removed without anyone doing basic WP:BEFORE. Now that there's a red link with a blue link, standard for listing human settlements that have WP:POTENTIAL, so it's again fine with the guidelines. (Keep) --Joy (talk) 13:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cyrillization of Turkish

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

Uncited and nothing in this article says why it is notable. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:06, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Bulgaria, and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:06, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can find sources talking about other Turkic languages such as Kazakh and Azerbaijani, because of course those have a history when it comes to Cyrillic. But no linguistic source that I have consulted talks about writing Turkish in Cyrillic. And the signal-to-noise ratio is so large that it is impossible to track down proper documentation of the claimed Bible. Uncle G (talk) 09:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CITF Form 40

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

Non-notable form that fails WP:GNG. No secondary WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS, unlike notable forms such as the SF-86 or DD Form 214. Longhornsg (talk) 06:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law, Military, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 06:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Travel Portland

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

May not pass WP:NCORP, was dubiously created after related Mr. Dude article was AfD'ed, with its content merged into this article. Might be better to merge everything into "Tourism in Portland, Oregon." PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 05:00, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism and Oregon. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 05:00, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Advertising. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's a refbombed article created specifically as a spin-out of another article at AfD which fails WP:NCORP, specifically the WP:AUD prong (as do a lot of Oregon articles, which is why we have more articles on random businesses in Oregon than any other jurisdiction in the world) but also with regards to significant coverage. The best articles are just local reporting on advertising buys. I agree this could be merged to a specific article on Portland tourism. SportingFlyer T·C 06:58, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Tourism in Portland, Oregon. Clearly does not meet NCORP on its own, but the coverage of campaigns is suitable for the Tourism article. Sounder Bruce 07:27, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG and HEY. Not sure why I couldn't be afforded even 24 hours to expand the article, which clearly covers a notable topic and now has 50+ reliable sources. I'm also not sure WP:BEFORE was completed, as searching "Travel Portland" at The Oregonian archives from 1987 to present via the Multnomah County Library yields 168 returns and a search for "Portland Oregon Visitors Association" (the same organization's former name) yields 550 returns. There are additional returns in the library's pre-1987 database. Of course some of these are passing mentions or reports released by the organization, but there's in-depth coverage in Oregon's paper of record spanning decades. There's still more to add, but already the article includes details about history, operations (including leadership, visitor centers and office locations), funding, specific tourism campaigns, and other funded projects. I can at least make sense of the nomination to delete Mr. Dude, but there's obviously sufficient coverage to support this standalone article. I would ask other editors to allow more time for this entry to be expanded and improved. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:02, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable, fails WP:NCORP. Created to circumvent consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Dude. A complete waste of all our volunteer time. Asparagusstar (talk) 23:28, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (keep or merge) I take it from what Another Believer says that the coverage in The Oregonian meets the WP:NCORP requirement for significant, independent, reliable, and secondary coverage, but another source meeting all four criteria is required, though it needn’t be regional or statewide as is the O. If such coverage exists (whether referenced in the article or not), then keep; otherwise merge to Tourism in Portland, Oregon. Whether a portion of the information comes from an article since deleted by consensus is immaterial, as is any speculation about the motives for creating this article. YBG (talk) 05:06, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@YBG: I have expanded Travel Portland extensively and there remain many sources to add. I oppose a merge to Tourism in Portland, Oregon, per WP:NOTMERGE. The resulting entry would be severely clunky and skewed towards Travel Portland, which is just one of many orgs that have done tourism work on behalf of the city (Portland Business Alliance / Portland Metro Chamber, Portland Development Commission / Prosper Portland, Regional Arts & Culture Council, Oregon Tourism Commission, etc). It does not make sense to fold all of this content about one entity into a broad article that is also in desperate need of a major expansion. The Travel Portland entry has content gaps spanning decades that I'm trying to fill, so I'll keep plugging away. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:39, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem now is that the article is significantly ref-bombed with articles that have absolutely nothing to do with Travel Portland. I see a maximum of one article which might be significant coverage, the Oregonian article where they changed their name, which I can't access, but the rest is just fluff, a couple interviews with local business magazines or passing mentions in articles that are about something else entirely. Wikipedia is not a random company's public relations wing. SportingFlyer T·C 18:11, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I could not disagree more with your assessment. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:17, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then identify the sources that makes this org notable. SportingFlyer T·C 18:23, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This could potentially have been a merge candidate to "Tourism in Portland, Oregon", but what tips the scales on passing NCORP is that there have been numerous reliable sources covering news about the organization itself and its campaigns. For instance, reliable news sources talking about new leadership of the org. This clearly indicates that the organization itself is notable, rather than just incidentally mentioned when covering tourism in the city. Steven Walling • talk 05:14, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked through all of the now 90(!) references in the article and all I see on the new leadership of the org is coverage from a local business journal in interview format. WP:NCORP is very strict, and WP:CORPDEPTH is policy - I'm not sure I see a single source here that is sufficiently independent of the organization. I just want someone to actually say "these sources go past WP:CORPTRIV." SportingFlyer T·C 05:40, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, no consensus. I think the cause of the creation of this article is irrelevant to whether or not the subject is notable. I'd like participants to seriously consider the possibility of a Merge option in addition to the standare Keep and Delete prospects.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:59, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NOTMERGE, a merge should be avoided if "the separate topics could be expanded into longer standalone (but cross-linked) articles", or "the topics are discrete subjects warranting their own articles". There is much, much more to say about Portland tourism than the content that currently lives at Tourism in Portland, Oregon or Travel Portland, and Travel Portland is just one of many organizations focused on tourism in the metro area. Yes, the tourism article needs a major expansion, but that should not be accomplished by merging this content there. The Travel Portland entry is specifically focused on the history and activities of just one organization. I've worked to expand the Travel Portland entry but there remain ~200 sources to review in the Oregonian archives alone. I have already cast a keep vote above and I would ask fellow editors to vote the same. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shami Stovall

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

Seems to fail WP:AUTHOR, I could not find any reliable independent sources about them. The current source used for their bio is a podcast interview their spouse did. Suggest deletion or redirect to List_of_Dragon_Award_nominees#Best_Young_Adult_/_Middle_Grade_Novel Emm90 (talk) 05:53, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Women, Science fiction and fantasy, Law, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Dragon Award nominees as WP:AtD for now. That's where Shami Stovall appears, and her being nominated seems notworthy, but in itself does not establish notability. This may well be a case of WP:TOOSOON, so I strongly feel a redirect is preferable to deletion. I don't know if the awards she has won are siginificant enough to establish notability in accordance with WP:ANYBIO. Daranios (talk) 16:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guantanamo Bay attorneys

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

Redirect to Center for Constitutional Rights as WP:ATD. Fails WP:NLIST, which is what this article is. This article is a collection of WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH and WP:SYNTH of lawyers who over decades represented various detainees at Guantanamo Bay. However, the list doesn't refer to the attorney as a collective group. If the attorneys are individually notable, they should have their own articles. Longhornsg (talk) 05:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Law, Cuba, and United States of America. Longhornsg (talk) 05:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of treaties of Turkey

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

I am not really familiar with lists. I read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone_lists but I am still not sure - for the lists in https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Turkey.html#Cites%20no%20sources should we just remove the ancient “uncited” tags? I mean if there are no red links do such lists need to be cited? Chidgk1 (talk) 05:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 05:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations and Law. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:07, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - User:Nedim Ardoğa who created this article has been deceased since 2022. — Maile (talk) 13:12, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see stopping notifications has been requested some years ago at https://github.com/wikimedia-gadgets/twinkle/issues/1476 but sorry I don’t know how to do that Chidgk1 (talk) 17:23, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UMSL Student Government Association

AfDs for this article:

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

WP:ORG non-commercial organization that does not operate on a national scale or have significant coverage from multiple unrelated sources (many sources are from UMSL or the UMSL student newspaper). The scope of UMSL Student Government Association is limited to the students of UMSL. Similar concerns were brought up in a 2008 AfD discussion but no notable sources were added.

There are also very few of these types of articles on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Student_governments_in_the_United_States). Articles on that list like Florida Student Association and Hawaii State Student Council are intra-state organizations that work for student populations across whole states whereas the UMSL SGA article serves a single school. GrantPeePee (talk) 03:32, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Schools, and Missouri. GrantPeePee (talk) 03:32, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:33, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Every school has a student government, and student organization are typically not notable. The whole article is only relevant to members. Reywas92^Talk 15:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already brought to AFD so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lysistrata: Adapted from Aristophanes for modern performance

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

No evidence of secondary coverage in reliable sources. Searching the article title, "Lysistrata" "Andrew Irvine" and "Lysistrata" "andrew david irvine" yield no good hits. Current article currently only has primary sources to back it up. Does not meet any of the other book notability criteria. Based5290 :3 (talk) 02:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Based5290 :3 (talk) 02:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I haven't found any reviews, scholarly or otherwise. No reason to redirect this to Andrew David Irvine; it's already mentioned there and the search function will turn up his article if anyone happens to search for it. -- asilvering (talk) 02:48, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This play has never had a real production, only a workshop performance, and no critics have written about it. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:28, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. Mileasel (talk) 04:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:TOOSOON, if it's only had a workshop performance and no real productions. If it does in future, and receives WP:SIGCOV, an article can be written including those sources. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:45, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muyiwa Awoniyi

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

Non-notable business executive who fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Notability is not inherited. Sources are either iffy, are promo, or are lacking substantial coverage of the subject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:11, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep I agree with the nominator that some of the sources lack substantial coverage on the subject, although the Rolling Stone and Music Week references do mention him in slightly more detail. The page was also created on February 1, 2025, one day before it was nominated for deletion, so I would prefer if this article was given some additional time to develop before we proceed any further with deletion. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 17:18, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Almost all the sources are either interview or press releases. They can neither establish WP:GNG nor WP:SIGCOV. Ibjaja055 (talk) 20:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this is a manager of notable singer-songwriters including Tems who has just won a Grammy Award and Omah Lay among notable others. It is this manager that managed Tems from their early career to Grammy Award. This manager meets WP:NBASIC when all sources that discuss him are combined. Some of those sources are here[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. The subject is mentioned multiple times in the sources above. Some of the articles are based on his social media posts suggesting that he is notable and the media keep watch of his social media activities and writing about it. Lacent Pak (talk) 05:50, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that these sources can further enhance the article, I encourage you to integrate them. However, I worry that the Pulse reference is too gossipy for Wikipedia as it hinges on a tweet that supposedly received some controversy. A few of the other sources you just provided, including the "Dating Rumor" article, are also unlikely to be of much help for similar reasons as the Pulse reference. As such, I would exercise caution to ensure that the content being added is encyclopedic in nature.Dobbyelf62 (talk) 18:22, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Stubify it. I'm the first to line up to get rid of another LinkedIn page of a run of the mill Nigerian business person, or music "producer", or special assistant to the president for outreach to Biafra. But this isn't like that. The subject appears notable, and has significant coverage in respected international media. Managers are not all alike, and some are actually creative artists themselves. Please, don't bite the legitimate newbies. Also, sometimes a shorter stub is better than a longer article with 12 crappy gossip stories from tabloid newspapers and YouTubers. Bearian (talk) 04:24, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian I hardly reply people at AfDs because I respect everyone’s opinion, but can you please clarify who is the “legitimate newbie” and whose action constitutes BITE? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:03, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A legitimate newbie is someone who is making a good faith effort to add content, but doesn't know how to add tags or formatting, or how to provide reliable sources. Nominating an article in the middle of edits is a little bitey, when the risk is low in the grand scheme of things here, but I might be wrong here about relative risks. Bearian (talk) 12:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian Please be sure of certain comments, I know the efforts I put in welcoming newbies and BITE isn't one of them. I nominated this article 25 hours after it was created and over 16 hours after it was last edited. This article has only been edited once (hours after I nominated it) by the article creator. So, I do not see where BITE is coming from at all, it is a serious comment that requires you to first be sure. Other users usually follow WP:NPPHOUR before acting on articles and the requirement is to wait for at least one hour to pass after creation before draftifying or nominating an article for deletion, that it not the case here. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. Bearian (talk) 13:53, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
keep. The available sources are enough to meet at least WP:NBASIC. Mekomo (talk) 14:12, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Clearly leaning towards keep
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:28, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tabasco Chocolate

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

It looks like an interesting product, but a WP:BEFORE is throwing up mainly trade magazines. The two sources used are likewise a trade magazine and a non-independent website selling the product. Most of the article is about Tabasco sauce. Can be redirected into Tabasco sauce, no sources mentioning the product appear to exist to justify a DUE merge. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 01:42, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Neither of the sources cited in this article has any content about this product anymore, and the content I have found on my own is minimal and not significant enough to justify an article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Products, and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am such a big fan of Tabasco Sauce that I have a poster of a bottle hanging in my kitchen. The Tabasco branded chocolate is a discontinued product that never received enough attention in reliable independent sources to become notable. On top of that, the article is so poorly written that it is deeply misleading. Cullen328 (talk) 09:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fortran 95 language features

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

Wikipedia is not a website for hosting documentation, manuals, or essays about the features of a particular language. See WP: NOTWEBHOST and not WP: HOWTO. Talk page discussion indicates that this appears to be a mirror of another tutorial page, and thus there might be copyright issues here as well. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:04, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If you're here to complain because you personally feel that this content is "useful" (which everyone knows is a terrible argument that wastes valuable volunteer time, per WP: USEFUL), then we can transwiki this content to another place, such as Wikibooks, or selectively merge content to Fortran. Please remember that this AfD is not your soapbox to wax poetic about your purely subjective notion of "usefulness". It is to determine whether it violates Wikipedia policy; specifically WP: NOTWEBHOST, WP: NOTHOWTO, and Wikipedia's policy on copyrighted materials. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I would argue that language features are what makes the language what it is. Especially when there are so many other languages out there. Labratscientist (talk) 01:59, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - You could talk about histories an all that non-stop, but for some, it is sometimes just down to the features or the support of the language that makes it unique from others. Labratscientist (talk) 02:01, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - There are multiple massive sections in the main Fortran article that already talk about the language's evolution. If you think that the content there is sufficient, this article isn't necessary and should be deleted. If you think that it isn't, then you've just made a great argument for merging. HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Computing. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 01:25, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge selected content, with added citations to Fortran. This is a very, very long article with only a single reference. I appreciate the work that went into it but this belongs on wikibooks or similar. BTW, while a lot of this reads more like a tutorial, we could use more detail on language features and syntax in programming articles here on Wikipedia in general! I welcome those involved in this article to improve the Fortran article. That article does not have a syntax section, is not well organized, and does not have a comprehensive overview of the language features and syntax. Caleb Stanford (talk) 04:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It has been badly written, over a period of 20 years, by many editors (at least one of whom one would think would know to cite sources — but, no, not a one) but that it has only one citation does not mean that many sources do not exist. I picked the "INQUIRE statement" from the bottom of the article to see what reference books come up covering just that. Before I ran out of steam, there being much more than what I cite here, I got:
  - "Other FORTRAN I/O statements". FORTRAN in MTS. MTS, the Michigan Terminal System. Vol. 6. University of Michigan Computing Center. October 1983. p. 356.
  - "INQUIRE". XL Fortran for AIX Language Reference (Version 4 Release 1 ed.). International Business Machines Corporation. 1996. pp. 311–316.
  - Carnahan, Brice; Wilkes, James O. (1989). "Additional input and output features". FORTRAN 77 with MTS and the IBM PS/2. College of Engineering, University of Michigan. p. 8—23.
  - Redwine, Cooper (2012). "Input/Output". Upgrading to Fortran 90. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 442–227. ISBN 9781461225621.
  - Gehrke, Wilhelm, ed. (2012). "Input/Output". Fortran 90 Language Guide. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 11—41–11—46. ISBN 9781447130147.
  - Behforooz, Ali; Sharma, Onkar P. (1986). "INQUIRE statement". FORTRAN 77 Syntax. Prentice-Hall. pp. 100–101. ISBN 9780835932738.
  - Counihan, Martin (2006). "Appendix A: Input and Output". Fortran 95 (2nd ed.). CRC Press. pp. 339–342. ISBN 9780203978467.
  - Adams, Jeanne C.; Brainerd, Walter S.; Hendrickson, Richard A.; Maine, Richard E.; Martin, Jeanne T.; Smith, Brian T. (2008). "Input and Output Processing". The Fortran 2003 Handbook: The Complete Syntax, Features and Procedures. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 346–361. ISBN 9781846287466.
  - Ramaraman, V. (1997). "Processing Files in Fortran". Computer programming in FORTRAN 90 and 95. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. pp. 282–283. ISBN 9788120311817.
  - Metcalf, Michael; Reid, John; Cohen, Malcolm; Bader, Reinhold (2024). "Operations on external files". Modern Fortran Explained: Incorporating Fortran 2023 (6th ed.). Oxford University Press. pp. 279–283. ISBN 9780198876595.
  - Joshi, Yogendra Prasad. "Use of files and related statements". An Introduction to Fortran 90/95: Syntax and Programming. Allied Publishers. pp. 388–397. ISBN 9788177644746.
  - Brainerd, Walter S. (2009). "Input and Output". Guide to Fortran 2003 Programming. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 294–299. ISBN 9781848825437.
  - Chamberland, Luc (1995). "INQUIRE". Fortran 90: A Reference Guide. Prentice Hall. pp. 270–272. ISBN 9780133973327.
- Some people have a lot of {{sfn}}s to add, but it is possible, and this extent of content is verifiable. Indeed, some of the aforementioned reference books have more on the INQUIRE statement than this article has. The current article is actually shorter than references on the subject. So not only is it verifiable, there's even scope for expansion. And yes, it should be clear from the chapter titles that it's not just the INQUIRE statement section of the article that these references support.
  Uncle G (talk) 07:16, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I think there are bigger issues here than the sourcing, though I agree with Caleb that the lack of sources in this article is independently problematic. We don’t host tutorials about how to use programming languages, because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a repository of cookbooks, tutorials, and mirrors of documentation. This literature should be used to supplement the existing article we have about Fortran. There are many things I can think of that are verifiable but do not warrant standalone articles. HyperAccelerated (talk) 07:25, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Thanks for the detailed reply. While I agree that some content is verifiable and can be salvaged, I would still favor moving such content into Fortran - and rewriting it to be a bit less like a tutorial, and more like an encyclopedic overview of the language. I agree with HyperAccelerated here. Thanks! 17:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC) Caleb Stanford (talk) 17:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jihad Salame

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

Declined prod with additional info added up on competing in Summer Universiade. I don't think that is enough to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 00:18, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Lebanon. LibStar (talk) 00:18, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, WP:SPORTCRIT is met by the wealth of newspaper sources at [28]. I'll wait for a native speaker to dive in further, but those from Al Anwar seem to indicate the subject was a 1987 national champion which would fulfill WP:NATH as well. --Habst (talk) 01:23, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]