Wikipedia:XfD today

Shortcuts

This page transcludes all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.

Speedy deletion candidates[edit]

Candidates for speedy deletion

Draft:About Huma Adnan

Amy Gallagher

Draft:Annie Jane Hughes Griffiths

User:Anupgrung/sandbox

Draft:April 2024 attack on Eternal Iranian

Draft:Arsam

Draft:Asbestos cookies

Draft:Autonomous cyber detection

Draft:Autonomous cyber detection - ACD

Draft:Autonomous cyber detection system - ACDS

BBL Drizzy

Draft:Bihar Mahadalit Vikas Mission

Draft:Franco-Algerian conflict

Frederik IX

Draft:Fun

Draft:Gajapati conquest of Gauda

Jehovah Lova Toussaint

Draft:John Demarco

Kooki (film)

Draft:List of mines in Russia

Draft:MundoFox (Latin American TV Channel)

Draft:Mustand:Iseloomustamine

Draft:National Redistricting Foundation

Draft:Navajo Nation Peacemaking Program

Draft:Old horseshoe crab

Draft:SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY FABULOUS DANCING DOLLS

Draft:Stacks (lilWavyMusic)

Draft:Stefaniia Shabatura

Draft:The news writer

Draft:Wraynel Hercules

Draft:Www.el-zohiri.com/2023/11/growing-and-producing-beans-in.html

Articles[edit]

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< May 12	May 14 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Hayeson Pepito[edit]

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a Filipino men's footballer, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 02:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Philippines. JTtheOG (talk) 02:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pink II[edit]

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

Fails GNG and NALBUM. Single source in article is to a message forum, nothing found in BEFORE that meets WP:SIRS, addressing the subject (the album) directly and indepth by independent reliable sources. Nothing is sourced for a merge, I don't think a redirect is useful or appropriate. // Timothy :: talk 02:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Umbrella fund[edit]

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

Failing notability that contains a single source only. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 12:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but improve the article a lot. The concept of “umbrella fund” or “fund with sub-funds” is certainly notable in UK law. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. So meets WP:WEBCRIT. Contributor892z (talk) 05:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 02:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Colleen Brown (artist)[edit]

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

WP:BLP of an artist and writer, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for artists or writers. As always, creative professionals are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because their work exists -- the notability test doesn't hinge on sourcing their work to itself as proof that it exists, it hinges on sourcing their work to external validatation of its significance, through independent third-party reliable source coverage and analysis about them and their work in media and/or books.
But this is referenced almost entirely to directly affiliated primary sources -- the self-published websites of galleries that have exhibited her work, "staff" profiles on the self-published websites of organizations she's associated with, etc. -- and the only footnotes that represent any kind of third-party coverage are a Q&A interview in which she's talking about herself in the first person and a single article in the local newspaper of her own hometown, which doesn't represent enough coverage to get her over the bar all by itself.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to be referenced better than this. Bearcat (talk) 21:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Authors, Women, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 21:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: subject of a 16 minute segment on CBC radio, holds a residency, has exhibited in many exhibitions. Plus, this well-referenced article seems to be the work of a new editor participating in an editathon, who submitted their work to AfC and had it approved, and has since created another well-referenced biography of a different artist; to delete this would be a slap in the face for a serious new contributor to the encyclopedia. (I was initially suspicious of COI or paid editing because I noticed that the editor had made 10 varied edits a little while before starting this article, but I note that the artist's name was on the list of "Suggestions for notable artists / writers / curators / contributors, etc. without articles:" at Wikipedia:Meetup/Vancouver/ArtAndFeminism 2024, so I believe this art historian is a genuine enthusiastic new editor in the field of artist biographies.) PamD 11:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Artists do not become notable for having exhibited in gallery shows by sourcing those gallery shows to content self-published by those galleries (as was done here) — artists only become notable for having exhibited in gallery shows if you can source the gallery shows to third-party content about the gallery shows, such as a newspaper or magazine art critic reviewing said show, but not a single gallery show here has cited the correct kind of sourcing to make her notable for that.

And the CBC source is an interview in which she's talking about herself in the first person, which is a kind of source that we're allowed to use for supplementary verification of stray facts in an article that has already passed WP:GNG on stronger sources but not a kind of source we can use to bring the GNG in and of itself, because it isn't independent of her. And no, articles aren't exempted from having to pass GNG just because they came out of editathons, either: editathons still have to follow the same principles as everybody else, and the articles resulting from them still have to properly source their notability claims. Bearcat (talk) 12:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While the CBC radio piece is an interview, surely her selection as the subject of an interview in a series on a major radio station is an indicator of notability? As is her selection for two residencies: the organisations hosting the residencies are independent of the artist, and there are sources from those organisations. PamD 21:59, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The CBC interview is from one of the CBC's local programs on one of its local stations, not from the national network, so it isn't automatically more special than other interviews just because it came from a CBC station instead of a Corus or Pattison or Rogers station. So it isn't enough to get her over GNG all by itself if it's the only non-primary source she has.

It isn't enough that the organizations hosting the residencies are independent of the artist — they aren't independent of the residency, so they're still affiliated sources. The source for a residency obviously can't be her own website, but it also can't be the website of the organization that she worked with or for either — it has to be a third party that has no affiliation with either end of that relationship, namely a media outlet writing about the residency as news, because the organization is still affiliated with the statement. Bearcat (talk) 14:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, reluctantly. It seems to me I've previously read something about this artist, and her work has been exhibited in well known galleries. I'm just not finding any additional independent reliable sources beyond the first one in the article. Willing to change my vote if better sourcing is found. Curiocurio (talk) 22:03, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep per PamD. This was not a person-picked-off-the-street interview. BD2412 T 01:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: borderline but I think tagging the article for relying on primary sources might be sufficient without needing to delete the entry. FuzzyMagma (talk) 11:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If primary sources are virtually all it has, then just tagging it for relying on primary sources isn't sufficient — it's not enough to assume that better sources exist that haven't been shown. Better sources have to be demonstrated to exist, not just speculated about as theoretically possible, in order to tip the balance between an AFD discussion and just being flagged for better sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 14:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not speculating, read your discussion above with PamD then made my decision. FuzzyMagma (talk) 14:09, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Subject fails WP:GNG as well as the four criteria set down by WP:NARTIST. The nominator's report is spot on. After discarding the interviews and the primary sources, we're left with a non-existent case for inclusion. Wikipedia is not a directory of artists, nor a collection of indiscriminate information. And the extensive discussion is rather surprising for such an evidently straightforward issue. -The Gnome (talk) 14:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
why are you discarding the CBC interview? FuzzyMagma (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per the CBC feature, combined with the weight of what seem to be adequate sources. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What adequate sources? I see exactly one. Curiocurio (talk) 00:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. With the Guleph Today piece and CBC coverage, there is non-primary coverage. Whether aspects of the biography sourced to primary sources are wholly due as paragraphic body text or could be better rendered as a list of works/residences is a content question at the article level rather than an inclusion/deletion question at the encyclopedia level. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 08:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Nicely done bio on the notability borderline. Don't we have more serious things to worry about? Carrite (talk) 16:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - most of the sources are primary, and not high-quality at that, as they are very promotional. She has very little reliable third-party coverage. Swordman97 ^{talk to me} 03:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A dozen warm-up edits then creation of a detailed article with mostly commercial non-archival references. Article has a cereal-filler claim to notability ("She is primarily known for her sculptural works which incorporate a variety of natural and industrial materials.") This looks like some kind of fan-page or COI. 2600:1700:8650:2C60:89EE:CBB:BDD3:F68E (talk) 04:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I am not finding any RS online to add to the article. She does exist as an author and artist but fails WP:Artist. WP:TOOSOON. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
above people mentioned Guleph Today and CBC, both are RS FuzzyMagma (talk) 07:20, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being mentioned in a RS source does not indicate that the coverage contributes evidence of the subject's notability. I agree with other commenters that this falls short of WP:Artist, her importance in Maple Ridge, British Columbia notwithstanding. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Executive Committee of Gagauzia[edit]

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

Fails GNG, Single source is primary, nothing found in BEFORE that meets WP:SIRS, addressing the subject 'directly and indepth. Nothing sourced in article for a merge, but no objection if there is a consensus for a redirect to Autonomous territorial unit of Gagauzia // Timothy :: talk 02:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Los Zodiac[edit]

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

This was hard to assess, especially as there are varying spellings used. I couldn't find enough to show it meets WP:NBAND / WP:GNG. Survived 2005 AfD ([[8]], but standards very different then. Boleyn (talk) 10:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Peru. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Peruvian rock:

From this it seems like there is some level of coverage in 2018's Demoler. El rock en el Perú 1965-1975 by Carlos Torres Rotondo
There may be some leads from this: "Very little has been written about the History of Rock in our environment. Only sketches (as some newspapers usually publish) and some studies such as the one done by Jose Miguel Gonzalo Garcia, entitled Development of Youth Music in Peru, give us a brief idea of this whole matter. But the closest thing to a treatise on the so-called underground current or alternative music comes from the university works of which I mention (but always from a giraffe perspective, based more on journalistic data or conversations with subways, than on personal experiences), the job that my friend Miguel Lescano did at the beginning of the 90s, or the Underground Rock -10 Years of Wild Operas by Alvaro Olano Dextre. All of them are the first formal attempts to capture a history of underground rock. Someone will try to object to me by saying, what about Pedro Cornejo's book? I'm sorry to contradict you little brother, but the Game without Borders - Approaches to Contemporary Music that Pedro published in 1994 is not considered, not even by Pedro Cornejo himself, a total work, at least it is not what many (like me) expected from Pedro Cornejo Guinassi, graduate in Philosophy, professor at La Católica, participant in the first years of underground rock, editor and collaborator of alternative publications and other publications."
es-wiki does not have an article for them, and nor are they actually covered at es:Rock_del_Perú or es:Historia_del_rock_en_el_Perú
They are not the Los Zodiacs from Getxo in Spain who had a song in a Pepsi ad (see this from El Correo)

I can't see what's in Torres, etc, but there's otherwise a dearth of reliable sourcing for the band other than being one of a number of early 60s Peruvian rock bands. Unless adequate info is discovered in Torres or other RS, redirect with retention of history and categories seems the sensible option. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 12:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, is there more support for a Redirection?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Premier League overseas broadcasters[edit]

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

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. No context to assert notability either. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. SpacedFarmer (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Football, Lists, United Kingdom, and England. SpacedFarmer (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:31, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Upon a search, I just get WP:PRIMARY sources from NBC, CBC, and tweets announcing who does which games. It's trivia and can be placed into the main broadcasting article. Conyo14 (talk) 22:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Relevant information and sources have been added to the article that will help give it more notability. [9], [10], [11], [12]--Claudio Fernag (talk) 07:59, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LISTCRUFT still applies, you think an article on some junk list makes a list notable, think again. SpacedFarmer (talk) 11:57, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources found by Claudio Fernag. Esolo5002 (talk) 13:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep GNG is well passed here and the sourcing for this list is certainly not in question, while the article is monitored closely to revert any errors or vandalism near immediately. We disqualify outright press releases, but certainly not reliable news sources, and the nominator is advised that they are perfectly acceptable to source a broadcast partner. Nate • (chatter) 18:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are as of now, at least 84 different sources in the article to back up its notability efforts or quota. BornonJune8 (talk) 9:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, but all but 6 are for articles, the rest are excuses to claim WP:RS. This argument is so 2007. Try harder next time. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete yes there are 84 sources, but not many are actually WP:SIGCOV of Premier League broadcasters, they're just saying "in country X, company Y have a contract for Z years and W money". I don't see any good quality sources e.g. linking overseas broadcasters together in one source (apart from [13], which is one source), which is a suggestion at WP:LISTN for when a list might be notable. This just read like a TV directory. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article is the one on broadcasting rights that has the best and most sources, I see no reason to delete it, it is completely encyclopedic.

PIKACHUNESS (talk) 18:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like WP:ILIKEIT. An analysis of the sources would help. Conyo14 (talk) 19:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is very valuable resource about the topic. Regpath (talk) 10:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another WP:ILIKEIT, please provide a policy-based rationale for keeping. Conyo14 (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, WP:ITSUSEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 16:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is no longer just an article about a list of broadcasters as it was in the beginning, now a context has been added that gives it notability and verifiable and reliable sources have been added, so the information must be maintained, but maybe in this case what should be done is move this to List of Premier League broadcasters, as it was previously, so that everything is grouped in a single article, both local and international rights.--Edu1388 (talk) 20:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would support the merge suggested above over deletion. Conyo14 (talk) 23:11, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here, one editor supporting a Merge but I see no target article mentioned here, just a proposal for a rename. This article has been expanded greatly since its nomination and a review of those newly added sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Airbiquity[edit]

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

All sources for this company are WP:ROUTINE coverage. Allan Nonymous (talk) 16:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, Software, Transportation, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean keep very difficult to find under all the regurgitated press releases but the Seattle Post-Intelligencer has done a couple of more substantial pieces on the company,^[1]^[2] which looks to have been more prominent in the 2000s. (I don't think the articles are still available online – if anyone would like me to email the full text to review, let me know). I'm not yet fully convinced of notability – we would want to see decent coverage from more than one source – but the situation is not quite as bad as it looks. – Teratix ₵ 06:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Cook, John (21 October 2005). "Ex-startup Airbiquity experiences a rebirth". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
^ Cook, John (22 January 2008). "Airbiquity rebounds with funding, deals". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I opened all of the refs, they are routine press releases, 404, tangential and such. Nothing to establish notability. A 1997 startup that had 50-100 employess before being bought up recently and has now disappeared. Desertarun (talk) 19:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you look for sources that weren't in the article? – Teratix ₵ 04:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Tash Garrison[edit]

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

Cannot find any sources besides the one 2003 report. Given it seems to lack official government recognition, WP:GNG applies over WP:NPLACE and I can find basically nothing about this place. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iraq. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename. There was a refugee camp there and I believe it was notable per 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and other sources. I think “garrison” is just a mistranslation of “مخيم” and the intended meaning is “refugee camp”. Mccapra (talk) 06:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem here is that, since this place is not government recognized, WP:GNG applies. The first four here are primary sources, 5 is WP:ROUTINE coverage, and 6 about another camp and only mentions this one in passing. Allan Nonymous (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Rename to Al-Tash refugee camp. Several thousand people lived here, the refs are good and satisfy gng. Desertarun (talk) 19:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input please
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, it would be helpful if the sources mentioned here could find their way into the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Pattani bombing[edit]

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

The sources are all from the time of the event. Need lasting coverage and impact to meet WP:EVENT. A search for sources yielded sources for a different bombing in Pattani in 2016. LibStar (talk) 02:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Terrorism, and Thailand. LibStar (talk) 02:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep article is well sourced and the incident has continued to be discussed both for itself and as part of the overall security situation in Thailand. A short documentary was made about one of the suspects. I've added links from 2018 and 2020. Article needs some cleanup especially the "attack" narrative that lacks inline citations. Oblivy (talk) 02:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandr Surikov (diplomat)[edit]

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

Fails GNG and NBIO. Recently deceased Russian diplomat. Sources found in article and BEFORE fail WP:SIRS. Source eval:

Comments	Source
Government obit, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source	1. www.mid.ru https://www.mid.ru/ru/activity/shots/vnutrivedomstvennye_novosti/nekrologi_pamyati_kolleg/1949977/ . Retrieved 2024-05-13 . `{{cite web}}`: Empty citation (help): Missing or empty \|title= (help)
Government decree, fails WP:IS, does not contain SIGCOV about the subject.	2. ^ "Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of July 29, 2017 No. 348 “On the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation in the Republic of Mozambique”" . Archived from the original on 2019-01-26 . Retrieved 2017-09-14 . `{{cite web}}`: Empty citation (help): Unknown parameter \|deadlink= ignored (\|url-status= suggested) (help)
Government decree, fails WP:IS, does not contain SIGCOV about the subject.	3. ^ "Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 16, 2018 No. 76 “On the Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation in the Kingdom of Swaziland on a part-time basis”" . Archived from the original on 2018-02-16 . Retrieved 2018-02-16 . `{{cite web}}`: Empty citation (help): Unknown parameter \|deadlink= ignored (\|url-status= suggested) (help)
Government obit, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source	4. ^ www.mid.ru https://www.mid.ru/ru/activity/shots/vnutrivedomstvennye_novosti/nekrologi_pamyati_kolleg/1949977/ . Retrieved 2024-05-13 . `{{cite web}}`: Empty citation (help): Missing or empty \|title= (help)
Obit based on government sources, fails WP:SIRS, all the normal obit problems plus the Russian government should not be considered a reliable source	5. ^ "Russian Ambassador to Mozambique Died" . TACC (in Russian) . Retrieved 2024-05-13 .

BEFORE found name mentions and government statements they released, and an interview, nothing meet WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from independent reliable sources. // Timothy :: talk 02:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honorary Chaplain to the King[edit]

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

This page is fundamentally flawed. The position of Honorary Chaplain to the King is a military appointment, for serving regular and reserve chaplains in the British and some Commonwealth armed forces. However much of the text refers to Chaplains to the King, who are members of the Ecclesiastical Household of the Royal Household, and are civilians, usually senior parish priests. I do not believe that the article can be repaired. As an alternative to deletion it would have to be wholly rewritten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncox001 (talk • contribs) 10:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC); listed on the log at 21:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility, Christianity, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The inaccuracies can easily be ironed out but the topic is notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails GNG. Nothing found in article or BEFORE that meets WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth. If sources are found that provide direct and indepth coverage, ping me. // Timothy :: talk 03:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nominator's contention is incorrect - Honorary Chaplain to the King is NOT a military appointment. In recent times a number of HCs have been appointed from the forces but many are also appointed who have no link to the forces. All are absolutely part of the ecclesiastical household. As such, the assertion that the article "cannot be repaired" is flawed. It should be improved, perhaps by starting here (p304) which details the creation of the position in 1881.----Pontificalibus 06:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As lacking significant in-depth coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. Also per WP:TNT: if someone believes this topic is notable, create a new article that's not a mess like this and with sufficient sources. AusLondonder (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep TNT is not necessary for a small stub such as this, any corrections can be made in situ. Has reliable sources book coverage, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here, the discussion is ongoing and would benefit from editors knowledgeable about this subject.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep An interesting and informative article about a position not necessarily written about often, nor well-known outside the UK. This would be even better with expansion. — Maile (talk) 02:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Supermium[edit]

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

Supermium is essentially just Chromium backported to Windows XP. Is this really notable enough for its own article? Seems like it could just have a short mention in the Chromium page. Bringing up the phrase "Supermium" on Google news just reports two articles related to the program, and two related to a Spotify subscription tier. There are several videos made on it however on YouTube (though, mostly by small creators). HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 01:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 01:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it also seems like the article was originally created by a sockpuppet, if that contributes anything. HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Supporting old versions of Windows is a large enough niche, and the article already has 2 external refs because of it. (Plus there are plenty of other browser articles for even smaller, less-relevant niches.) -Pmffl (talk) 17:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Fusitua[edit]

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

I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject, a New Zealand rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 23:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and New Zealand. JTtheOG (talk) 23:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Think there's just about enough when sourcing snippets are combined, such as this, this, this among others. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- For future reference, a database profile and two primary sources do not come close to meeting GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 18:59, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per JTtheOG, can't see any thorough coverage of this person. David Palmer aka cloventt (talk) 02:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a young player at the beginning of his career and he is playing regularly for the Blues now. There are already more sources available about this player than used for this stub and it is foreseeable that there will be more written about him in the future. Ruggalicious (talk) 23:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ruggalicious: Which sources did you find? JTtheOG (talk) 03:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be helpful to get a review of sources establishing GNG.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akade[edit]

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

No clear notability. Creation tends to indicate an undeclared conflict of interest. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG. MeltPees (talk) 06:15, 7 May 2024 (UTC) — MeltPees (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd like to hear from more experienced editors.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Atlanta[edit]

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

Lacking secondary sources specifically about the consulate. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGCRIT. AusLondonder (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Organizations, Taiwan, United States of America, and Georgia (U.S. state). AusLondonder (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a defacto consulate, and not the same level as an embassy. Fails GNG and WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 23:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are articles regarding the Taiwanese offices in Ho Chi Minh City and also São Paulo. Would those also fall under this blanket reason? Toadboy123 (talk) 04:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if they fail GNG, yes. LibStar (talk) 04:35, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Toadboy123 embassies, consulates and other diplomatic offices must meet WP:GNG which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" AusLondonder (talk) 06:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect to Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States#Consular districts by missions, where the subject is already mentioned, per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. I did not find significant coverage in reliable sources in my searches for sources. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 09:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is there to merge? Also of course ATD is only part of the deletion policy. The eighth point at WP:DEL-REASON which describes valid criteria for deletion, states "Articles whose subjects fail to meet the relevant notability guideline" is a valid reason to delete. AusLondonder (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I support a redirect (with the history preserved under the redirect). A redirect gives editors like Toadboy123 (talk · contribs), the article's creator, the option of doing a selective merge of content to Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States#Consular districts by missions. Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Atlanta discusses the subject's location; how it was established on 1 March 1979, the day after the signing of this communiqué; what its former name was; what states it represents; and the cultural center it oversees. Some of this content could be merged to the target article. Cunard (talk) 05:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Max Silvestri[edit]

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

Not notable - no significant coverage of the subject and possibly promotional Pprsmv (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Entertainment, United States of America, and Rhode Island. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:28, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Not a strong keep, but there appears to be sufficient notability - The sources in the article currently are not useful due to being interviews or dead links, but there are some reviews of his work that can be found with minimal effort that tend to indicate notability (Exclaim, The Diamondback, Vulture) - There are also interviews, Q&As and other sources, but generally they are not as strong as the 3 reviews above to establish notoriety. Shazback (talk) 19:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fayse Goh[edit]

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

the article appears to be very promotional. I also searched up the name, and it appears to plagarize his youtube channel's description. Gaismagorm (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Malaysia. Gaismagorm (talk) 20:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing.

Logs: 2024-04 ✍️ create

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 01:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was Draftified‎ with consent of creator Star Mississippi 02:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bunker (upcoming film)[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

No evidence found this meets N:FILM with this the only piece newer than what's in the article and not enough to indicate notability for an unreleased film. Star Mississippi 01:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Film. Star Mississippi 01:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it's too soon for the article to be in mainspace, then I vote draftify. The Film Creator (talk) 01:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment My only argument for the article to be kept was that these three sources from Screen International, Deadline Hollywood and JoBlo.com were published at different dates and each of them were about different topics and yet all of them are related to this film. IMO, I believe at least three (or four) reliable sources are needed for a film-related article, particularly if the film is upcoming or unreleased, to be eligible for mainspace. The Film Creator (talk) 01:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The latter two are from 2021 and I can find nothing to indicate this has progressed sufficiently for N:FILM or that it will be released. I have no objection with it being re-draftified if you'd be willing should it close that way. Star Mississippi 02:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Star Mississippi Per WP:NFF, WP:NYF and WP:CRYSTAL, I'm content that the article be moved back to draftspace until new and reliable information about this film is published. The Film Creator (talk) 02:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have done so. I suggest waiting for its release, which I note you also suggested at the first deletion discussion for this film. Star Mississippi 02:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hannah Ryder[edit]

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

Very questionable WP:SUSTAINED notability Amigao (talk) 01:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Kenya. Let'srun (talk) 01:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Head of a UN Agency might be notable, but sourcing is about the initiatives of this agency, not about this person. I don't find much else we'd use for RS either. Oaktree b (talk) 01:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GJ Stoutimore[edit]

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

There is zero evidence of the subject's notability on any standard. Virtually every source is either to the subject's own writing, links to buy the subject's book, or marketing material. (Even apparently reliable sources are not; the Kirkus Reviews source is actually from "Kirkus Indie," a paid placement, and the BookTrib.com reviews are also paid placements on a book marketing platform.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The book has no notable reviews as explained, and there is no coverage of the author otherwise. What's used now in the article is primary sourcing or product placements. Oaktree b (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wrightspeed X1[edit]

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

This article dates from 2006, a period when one might argue with success that Wikipedia was in a major growth phase, and that poorly sourced articles were acceptable on the basis that they might be improved. This one has been edited periodically, but not improved. It has a single source, and does not pass WP:GNG. It is interesting, but gives undue weight to the vehicle, which is only notable for its power train, not for anything else about it. There is thus no objection to merge and redirect as an outcome to this discussion, with the merge target being the source of the powertrain, or with the manufacturer of the chassis. There appears to be no individual article on the designer himself, or that might be a valid target. I am thus asking for consensus not only on the fate of the article, but on any merge target as well. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:40, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:40, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete I've found a few sources for this [14], [15] (Old CNET, so still good), [16], [17] but I feel they don't really have the WP:DEPTH here to satisfty WP:GNG, so I'm gonna second the nom here. Allan Nonymous (talk) 01:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Allan Nonymous By seconding the nomination please be aware that merge and redirect to a so far undetermined target is a suitable outcome. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 15:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Some coverage found, [18] and [19]. Merge to Wrightspeed or the Ariel Atom? I'm not sure. Oaktree b (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b Given that choice, I think it is more relevant to Wrightspeed than the Aerial Atom. However, Wrightspeed ends up at an article of a different name, but mainly about Wrightspeed. I think there needs to be some background work here by someone who can rationalise what is what. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I see some support for redirect, but no consensus as to a target. We shouldn't need another full week to settle on a target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Wrightspeed" seems like a good redirect choice. Oaktree b (talk) 01:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Revo Powertrains which is the powertrain company founded by Mr. Wright (under the Wrightspeed name?). Redirect doesn't make sense to me as Revo doesn't include anything about this car. Oblivy (talk) 02:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kristen Onsgard[edit]

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

Bridge player. Seems like a total failure of WP:GNG. Specifically, there is not a single independent source in the article, and I was not able to find any either. From WP:GNG: "Independent of the subject excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it". Within bridge, "affiliated with the subject" means bridge federations, leagues, and tournaments - and of course also the subject herself (here, I'm referring to the Amazon page for a book.) Prolonged attempts to explain the creator what a significant and independent source is, have not bore fruit at all; a discussion of this nature might also come up during this discussion. References to a bridge SNG might also come up, which is irrelevant as long as GNG is not met. Geschichte (talk) 15:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - We have already gone through this review process with this user. My account is autopatrolled, new articles I create should not have to go through the review process as I am supposed to be trusted to know what types of articles meet Wikipedia guidelines.

Kristen won a North American Bridge Championship (NABC). These Bridge events are open to players around the world and many fly in, including the world's top professional players, to compete at these 10 day tournaments. Winning an unlimited event at an NABC is very prestigious achievement. I created Kristen's page, and also included a picture.

Geschichte decided to move this new article to Draft space. There was discussion on this user's Talk page about this. I asked for more senior Wikipedia editors to review the submission. They decided that the page was notable, overruled Geschichte, and Star Mississippi moved the article to the main Wikipedia on April 7, asking Geschichte to take it to AfD if there was any issues.

One would have thought the discussion was over, but Geschichte retaliated by adding

to Kristen's page on April 11, having just been overruled on that very issue.

Since April 11 the page has been edited by others, including additional information about Kristen and more references added.

I removed the "no significant coverage" banner today. Geschichte then retaliated again by submitting this to AfD.

I have created 7 pages on Bridge players this year. All are similar in style, scope. None of them have been sent to AfD. I have probably created 300+ Wikipedia pages for Bridge players over the last few years.

I don't want to get into a flame war, but "Prolonged attempts to explain the creator what a significant and independent source is, have not bore fruit at all" is not what has happened. Another Wikipedia editor, Star Mississippi overruled Geschichte issues. This is Geschichte second retaliation to being overruled. The first retaliation was adding the banner, the second retaliation was submitting this to AfD almost a month after it was approved.

A general rule of thumb in Bridge is anyone who has won a World event, won a European event, or won a North American Bridge Championship is meets the notability requirements, based on comparisons with other sports.

Kristen meets that criteria.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 03:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She more than likely does meet notability criteria, but we need sourcing about this person in order to build the article. What's used now isn't acceptable. Oaktree b (talk) 01:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - In "Independent of the subject excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it", the article's subject in this case is surely Kristen Onsgard. Someone affiliated with her is surely intended to mean a family member, friend, or someone who is part of the same circle. Surely interpreting it as excluding works produced by a national bridge federation is interpreting it far more broadly than was intended? JH (talk page) 09:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Direct quote from WP:SPORTCRIT: "governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their players" Geschichte (talk) 20:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - please can someone confirm which source(s) show significant coverage of Onsgard? I have checked each one and can't find any. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as I was pinged. I don't view myself as having overruled Geschichte as that's not really a thing here. I believed the article deserved a chance in mainspace, and I restored it acting as an editor, not as an admin. I have not looked further and likely will not during the run of this discussion so I take no point on this deletion discussion. Geschichte disagreed with my restoration, as is within their right as an established editor, and brought it here for the community to discuss. That's exactly the process that should happen. Nicolas.hammond, being autopatrolled does not mean your articles can't be brought for deletion. I'd venture a guess that every editor who has written more than a handful has had one of the articles they started brought for deletion. It is not personal, although it may feel it. Please look for independent, reliable sources which will help determine whether Onsgard is notable, not any "rule of thumb". Star Mississippi 01:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This needs input from someone who understands who Wikipedia works. The comments above need not be characterized by me as they speak for themselves, with non-existing concepts such as "approval", "overruling", "retaliation" etc. Geschichte (talk) 07:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please avoid interpersonal drama, and focus on substantive arguments relating to notability as determined by our guidelines.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Outside of team profiles, there is no coverage for this person. Even what's used now in the article is ranking listings from various bridge federations. We need articles in media of some kind about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 01:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12Go[edit]

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

Does not meet the WP:NCORP/WP:GNG. Sources are based on what they say or adverts. There was this one by The South African but the author is "a junior campaign management who inspires and empowers you to create marketing that your customers will love; igniting real results for your business" so not reliable/independent so I removed it along with blogs and other non-RS (written by contributors and/or sponsored). I was unable to find any reliable sources about the company. S0091 (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Travel and tourism, and Asia. S0091 (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and Thailand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the article. Here is some more sources:

https://www.ttrweekly.com/site/2024/02/12go-shines-a-spotlight-on-its-sales-stars https://www.traveldailynews.asia/column/interviews/transforming-ground-transportation-a-conversation-with-ron-hoffman-ceo-of-12go/ https://nl.mashable.com/travel/8863/12go-pioneering-multimodal-travel-from-south-east-asia-to-the-world https://lamag.com/contributor-content/empowering-solo-journeys-12gos-guide-to-top-solo-female-travel-destinations-in-asia-for-2024 https://www.freep.com/story/special/contributor-content/2024/04/02/leadership-in-data-driven-travel-insights-deciphering-12gos-top-2024-new-year-destinations-in-asia/73182956007/ https://www.azcentral.com/story/special/contributor-content/2024/01/25/12gos-revealed-insights-reflecting-on-the-top-2024-new-year-destinations-in-asia/72352136007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/special/contributor-content/2023/08/30/redefining-leadership-a-glimpse-into-the-team-and-philosophy-of-12go/70721506007/ https://www.stltoday.com/news/nation-world/streamlining-group-adventures-how-12go-is-transforming-travel-planning-in-asia/article_24825eec-3456-5d22-b87b-b9f0eb401291.html https://www.thesouthafrican.com/business/travel-business/12go-charting-the-course-of-innovative-travel-in-southeast-asia-october-2023/ https://www.ttgasia.com/2022/10/07/airasia-12go-create-all-in-one-transport-booking-solution-for-travellers/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/10/bookaway-books-35m-to-scale-up-its-ground-transportation-booking-platform/ https://newsroom.airasia.com/news/2022/10/3/airasia-super-app-expands-the-booking-capability-to-include-land-and-sea-transportation-modes Stromeee (talk) 16:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stromee, about half of those links will not even open for me. The others are telling me something - that 12GO aspires to be a one stop travel solution and such like, but there is a lot of reporting here and not much analysis. WP:ORGCRIT says:

These criteria, generally, follow the general notability guideline with a stronger emphasis on quality of the sources to prevent gaming of the rules by marketing and public relations professionals.

and so per WP:CORPDEPTH:

The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization. Such coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements, and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about the organization.

We need multiple sources of this level. So, which sources do you think meet this level of significant coverage? I am not seeing it - but again, five of those links simply won't open in Europe. If we can focus our attention on the best sources, I can make the effort to access those via VPN. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To @Sirfurboy's point, @Stromeee I suggest following WP:THREE. Also, contributor posts like USA Today are not WP:RS and per WP:TRADES, trade publications generally cannot be used to establish notability. S0091 (talk) 17:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It's pretty tough sifting for actual coverage among all the promotion. This 2017 Skift article covers the subject in two short paragraphs, with some original analysis.[20] --Paul_012 (talk) 10:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merdeka Memorial Clock Tower, Kulim[edit]

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

WP:MILL structure that fails WP:GNG and WP:NGEO. No sources to describe the significance; two news sources provide evidence in cursory coverage that it was constructed but no detail to constitute WP:SIGCOV. WP:BEFORE search turns up no additional evidence of notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Malaysia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Plenty of hits about the clock tower in the Singapore National Library, such as [21], but it seems you need to open them on-site in order to be able to read the articles. I've been able to pull these up [22]. Oaktree b (talk) 01:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking at this @Oaktree b. There are actually numerous merdeka (aka "independence") towers/monuments in Malaysia, and this article is specifically about the one in Kulim. The searches you linked are for other cities' merdeka towers. A search adding "Kulim" brings up just the one cursory result already sourced in the article, see here. Just sharing in case this info changes your !vote; thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files[edit]

File:Wilfred Rhodes.jpg[edit]

No source information given; replaceable by File:Rhodes bowling front 3.jpg. Wikiacc (¶) 00:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Between You and Me MusicVideo.jpg[edit]

Screenshot's easy to explain in brief words already. No need to display band members in the video just to identify them there. No proof that omitting the screenshot detriments understanding of the whole song (or music video). May fail "contextual significance" criterion. George Ho (talk) 00:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dctalk betweenyouandme3.jpg[edit]

No proof that this cover art is of one of commercial releases. Found one promo-only release using it (discogs). Other (retail) cover art already used. Fails "minimal number of items" and "contextual significance" criteria. George Ho (talk) 00:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stewart Farm - Memoir of Aura Stewart historic marker.jpg[edit]

Per c:COM:FOP US, freedom of panorama only extends to buildings. This historical marker is dated 2003 and there is no evidence to suggest that the text is freely licensed. As c:COM:CB#Noticeboards and signs states, "detailed informational and educational noticeboards/signs [...] are almost always copyright-protected". ✗plicit 00:14, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete—since the marker originates after 1989, the text on it is protected by copyright. The photo must be deleted to avoid infringing. (As a reminder, state government works like this are not automatically placed in the public domain like federal government works, unless state says otherwise, and Michigan's does not.) Imzadi 1979 → 00:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Ahri.boy (talk) 02:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Clash of the titansposter.jpg[edit]

Remove from Andromeda (mythology). Pretty sure this image fails WP:NFCC#8 with its use in Andromeda (mythology)#In film since the subject of the article is not the film. Readers can just go to Clash of the Titans (1981 film), which is linked at Andromeda (mythology)#In film, to see the poster since the poster meets all WP:NFCC in Clash of the Titans (1981 film). Steel1943 (talk) 00:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Twelfth Man Statue TAMU.jpg[edit]

Copied from [23]. Now unused. (Unclear if F9 applies because the uploader initially claimed fair use.) Wikiacc (¶) 02:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ankit Tiwari Photos.jpg[edit]

Contains a watermark that doesn't seem to correspond to the uploader's username --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 02:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upon searching on Google, it wasn't his own work. Delete. Ahri.boy (talk) 02:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carlton logo 1995.jpg[edit]

This should be considered to be a fair use file due to its background and since this file isn't used in mainspace, converting it is moot and should be deleted. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 02:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wuthering Waves logo.jpeg[edit]

Now superseded by File:Wuthering Waves logo.svg. Ahri.boy (talk) 02:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Harold Kelly Hill Top Dance Hall Stark Galleries.jpg[edit]

This painting may still be under copyright; the uploader asserts {{PD-US}} without giving a reason. Painter is Harold Osman "Cowboy" Kelly (American, 1884–1950) and limited information on the painting is available online. Wikiacc (¶) 02:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Day the Mountain Thanked the Sea Stark Galleries.jpg[edit]

This painting may still be under copyright; the uploader asserts {{PD-US}} without giving a reason. Painter is Dorothy Hood (American, 1919–2000) and limited information on the painting is available online. Wikiacc (¶) 02:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dawson Watson Landscape Stark Galleries.jpg[edit]

This painting may still be under copyright; the uploader asserts {{PD-US}} without giving a reason. Painter is Dawson Dawson-Watson (UK/US, 1864–1939) and limited information on the painting is available online. Wikiacc (¶) 02:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Edward Schiwetz Academic Building TAMU Stark Galleries.jpg[edit]

This painting may still be under copyright; the uploader asserts {{PD-US}} without giving a reason. Painter is Edward M. "Buck" Schiwetz (American, 1898–1984) and limited information on the painting is available online. Wikiacc (¶) 02:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Silver Taps TAMU.jpg[edit]

Photo copied from [24], plus the sculpture is likely copyrighted. Claimed {{PD-US}} without justification. Delete or relicense as non-free. Wikiacc (¶) 02:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Menos TAMU.jpg[edit]

The sculpture depicted is copyrighted (as a US sculpture from 1992) but erroneously claimed {{PD-US}}. Delete or relicense as non-free. Wikiacc (¶) 02:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Victory Eagle Statue TAMU.jpg[edit]

Photo copied from [25], plus the sculpture is likely copyrighted. Claimed {{PD-US}} without justification. Delete or relicense as non-free. Wikiacc (¶) 02:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:NBA 2K players[edit]

Propose merging Category:NBA 2K players to Category:NBA 2K

Nominator's rationale: Only one subject in category Let'srun (talk) 02:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:19th-century Canadian people (post-Confederation)[edit]

Propose merging Category:19th-century Canadian people (post-Confederation) to Category:19th-century Canadian people

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between century and confederation status. There isn't a Canadian people (post-Confederation) category. Mason (talk) 00:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fran Saleški Finžgar[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Fran Saleški Finžgar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Works by Fran Saleški Finžgar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose merging Category:Novels by Fran Saleški Finžgar to Category:Slovenian novels

Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This entire category tree only has two pages in it: the author and one novel they work, which isn't helpful for navigation. (Notably it has just as many categories as pages). Mason (talk) 00:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fran Levstik[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Fran Levstik (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Delete for now. This category only has two pages in it, the author and the list of their works. That's not helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 00:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fujiwara no Shunzei[edit]

Propose merging Category:Fujiwara no Shunzei to Category:Hyakunin Isshu poets

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge for now. This category only has two pages in it. One of which is the author's work and the other is the author. That's not helpful for navigation. Mason (talk) 00:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

NOT:DICTIONARY[edit]

NOT:DICTIONARY → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a dictionary (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The "NOT:" namespace doesn't exist, nor it is short for a real namespace. This is the only page of its kind that uses the NOT pseudo namespace and has seen zero usage. (Special:PrefixIndex/NOT:) A (standard) redirect to this page that it points to is WP:DICTIONARY, which is already shorter. JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 01:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, generally shouldn't be having redirects from mainspace to project space. BilledMammal (talk) 01:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOT#DICTIONARY works and is sufficient. Jclemens (talk) 01:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules[edit]

Miscellany[edit]

Deletion review[edit]

[1] Cook, John (21 October 2005). "Ex-startup Airbiquity experiences a rebirth". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

[2] Cook, John (22 January 2008). "Airbiquity rebounds with funding, deals". Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

[1]

[2]

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creation Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Version 1.0 Editorial Team Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and votings	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Voting is not evil Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates