Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

WP:AFD/Y

Purge page cache if page isn't updating.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

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

< August 05	August 07 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Klover

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

I'm not completely sure that this band is notable. I was able to find a description of the band in Trouser Press, a brief review by Robert Christgau (!), a brief review by Visions [de], and an interview with a bit said about Klover. Edit: Wow, I didn't even notice that two of those are already linked in the article. toweli (talk) 00:22, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Massachusetts. toweli (talk) 00:22, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources uncovered by the WP:BEFORE are good. A bit slight for a standalone article. Therefore a slight merge to Gang Green#Second hiatus (1990–1995). There are a number of possible redirect targets; I chose this because of what Trouser Press wrote: "Klöver has roots in the mighty tradition of Boston’s Bud-guzzling skatepunks, Gang Green, in the persons of guitarist Chris Doherty and drummer Brian Betzger. [...] As of early ’96, however, Klöver had folded and Gang Green was back in action." Geschichte (talk) 08:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:35, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pontus Aspgren

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. Only primary sources provided. LibStar (talk) 23:55, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Sweden. LibStar (talk) 23:55, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Black Liberation and Palestine Solidarity

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

No sigcov anywhere, no reviews, I found it cited a few places but no commentary. Redirect to author Lenni Brenner? PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Palestine. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Black-Palestinian solidarity. I haven't found sigcov of this volume either. I don't think a redirect is appropriate in this case, since this is a reasonable search term for the broad topic, which is notable. Our article on it is at Black-Palestinian solidarity, and this title should redirect there instead of to Lenni Brenner. -- asilvering (talk) 01:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:07, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I originally made this as a delete vote, but I'm changing it to redirect since I don't see any good reason to delete the history. -- asilvering (talk) 02:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kachela

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

No evidence for or assertion of notability under WP:GNG or other guidelines. No WP:SIGCOV. I propose to redirect to Sindhis but bringing to AfD after PROD was contested and another editor's BLAR was reverted. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Pakistan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:09, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jhala Man Singh

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

While there are several passing WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of this figure in Indian history, I can find no WP:SIGCOV of Jhala Man Singh/Bida Jhala/Jhala Manna. (The sources provided also include only trivial mentions or are unreliable per WP:NEWSORGINDIA.) Disputed PROD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, Military, and Rajasthan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Jhala Man singh was a rajput general of Maharana Pratap who had a great contribution in Battle of Haldighati

See sources Mewar & the Mughal Emperors (1526-1707 A.D.) - Page 94 Man Singh Jhala was in the command of left wing...and was assisted by Jhala Bida of Badi - Sadri

Akbar the Great: Political history, 1542-1605 A.D clearly mentions Jhala Bida of Badi Sadri Raged Pratihar (talk) 05:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cop Tales 2000

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

Could find nothing on this book except the single source already in the article, which is not enough. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Without additional sourcing, this fails WP:NBOOK, and as a collection of works by multiple authors, a WP:ATD-R option faces WP:XorY problems. -2pou (talk) 00:29, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dirk Van de Put

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

Doesn't meet WP:NOTABILITY, except with reference to other articles (i.e. Irene Rosenfeld and Mondelez International). Tule-hog (talk) 22:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: He is a prominent CEO, so I guess I'm testing deletionist waters with this. Does read a bit like a resume, which could just need attention.

Tule-hog (talk) 22:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Belgium. Shellwood (talk) 23:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, prominent CEO with enough coverage to meet the GNG (although the article is lacking) Microplastic Consumer (talk) 23:09, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mickey's Mechanical House

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

Fails WP:GNG with only one source. Almost entirely a plot summary. Found nothing via WP:BEFORE. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Comics and animation, and Disney. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: added a few things. Seems to have attracted enough attention to be retained. If other users disagree, a redirect to Mickey Mouse Works is absolutely warranted in my opinion. So very opposed to deletion of this. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tal Afar uprising

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

This doesn't seem like a notable event. There are no records cited of casualty figures or combatant numbers. The British commander isn't even noted. Not to mention, this article is written pretty poorly and with a clear nationalist slant. Insanityclown1 (talk) 20:33, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Iraq, Turkey, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 20:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Samsun clashes (1920)

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

Article doesn't seem notable, sources are not reliable or verifiable. Insanityclown1 (talk) 20:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Turkey, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 20:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment tr:Samsun is featured but as far as I can tell does not mention this - I have linked this discussion on that article talk page in the hope someone knows better than me. Also if the clashes with British were significant I guess one of you military experts can find an English language source Chidgk1 (talk) 06:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takatof

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

There is no RS coverage of this program. This is a program run by a UAE government charity. The only coverage of this program is by sources that are not independent of the UAE government. thena (talk) 20:42, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Temple, Indiana

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

The cited history calls this Temple Station, which is what it looks like. I'm not seeing evidence it ever actually developed into a town. Mangoe (talk) 17:28, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 17:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
- A. Temple seems to have gotten "Temple" platted at least in the 1920s.
- It's on this 1950 census map.
- Post office applications in 1903 and 1933 just reiterate that it was between English and Marengo. One of the PO applicants was A. Temple.
- This history suggests it was on a historic road of pioneer days, and later supported a school and a church.

jengod (talk) 07:24, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Jengod, is this a vote to Keep this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High Point Place

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

Lack of significant coverage by reliable sources. Sources used consist of an article saying it is being built, a local mention that it got a new roof and a local article about HOA fees. The guidelines at WP:NBUILDING points out that most buildings that aren't historically or architecturally significant "require significant in-depth coverage." This topic lacks significant coverage. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:36, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to gather more sources. Sorry about that. MiamiMogul (talk) 20:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manto (musician)

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

I'm not finding much of anything in a BEFORE search on this musician other than YouTube videos of a few of their performances. None of the usual press reviews of notable musicians. The article is part of a walled garden on the Munshi/Munsi family. Of the current citations, the Ghosh book is used as a source in all of these Munsi articles, and it is not clear if it is a connected source. The Eklund source is connected as an extended family member. The musician does not meet inclusion criteria for WP:NMUSICIAN nor WP:GNG. Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, India, and West Bengal. Netherzone (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 18:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:32, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darby Lloyd Rains

AfDs for this article:

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

16 years ago when this was first nominated it was allowed on a technical sng pass and someone noted it needed sourcing. Well 16 years later it's entirely bereft of a reliable source and pornbio has been consigned to the ranks of deprecated guidelines. Fails gng and ent. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Sexuality and gender, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR with at least three significant roles in notable films. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC) (Added a few sources, more sources exist).[reply]
Can you list the films and roles please

And the sources added? Ta Spartaz ^Humbug! 00:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the page, check page history and the link "edits since nomination" on this page. Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. M S Hassan (talk | contributions) 09:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Except the nom's concerns have been addressed. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He obviously disagrees with your assertion. You stated she had 3 significant roles in notable films. What were they? The Wp:onus is on you to show what they are here. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
’Obviously’? So the page still has no source? OK. I will assume good faith then. As for the rest of your comment, unless you are joking (it’s rather funny), I will assume good faith too: again, just read the page. You need to click on the title of the article on top of this page. I’m not going to copy paste the whole page here. And, by the way, what did you find during your BEFORE? Also, during the 1st AfD, the page was not ’allowed on technical sng pass’ but with a reference to (ANY)BIO (no technical mention of PORNBIO) and with a mention of ’definitely some claims to notability’. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comment: Lloyd Rains also clearly meets the requirements for the notability of actors for another reason: her prolific and noted contributions to the field; and probably passes the threshold for general notability requirements given the amount of ’’multiple independent sources" mentioning her importance in the said field, her roles and performances..-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we need to hear from more editors. An aside though: Are we really going to talk about "noted contributions to the field" for porn as if it were the sciences, the arts or diplomacy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to relist aside: Yes, we certainly are. Especially in the Golden Age of Porn and with directors and artists that had such a strong and honest conviction they were playing an important part in the underground culture of their time and in the history of film. Various films with Lloyd Rains are genre films (horror, thriller, etc) that go far beyond what could be described as "porn" in a derogative way. And various sources, some used as references in the article (you will note that I used no sources from inside the "adult industry" and they include extremely notable and reliable film magazines and scholarship) about her films and performance do indeed mention that point, some in awe at the quality of the productions and at Lloyd Rains's abilities as an actress (one review finds her acting "insufferable", though; and that's not my opinion, which does not count and has nothing to do with my !vote and reply). Now, one might disagree and consider the result has no value, is immoral, tasteless, shocking, silly and trash, and not like it. But it's definitely a "field" in my opinion and her contributions to it were clearly prolific, and noted. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aside: I was not even thinking about "porn" when I wrote my additional comment (but about film in general). But, yes, I do think "pornography" is a field. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:15, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'll close this discussion according to policy and consensus despite my own view of this "profession". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:09, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never doubted you would. Thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uxbridge Arena and Recreation Centre

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

Article about a small-town municipal recreation centre, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for local buildings. As always, arenas are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show passage of WP:GNG on third-party reliable source coverage about them in media -- but this is referenced entirely to the self-published websites of entities directly affiliated with the venue -- the town government, the local minor hockey league, the local junior hockey team and a local real estate agent -- with not even one hit of GNG-worthy coverage shown at all.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to be referenced better than this. Bearcat (talk) 17:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ice hockey and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 17:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i mean you could just not be a nerd and just allow it lol, those are valid sources unfortunately you are not going to find scholarly articles on a arena Jp3333 (talk) 11:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how Wikipedia works. It isn't our job to keep an article about everything that exists, even if we have to rely on sourcing self-published by directly affiliated entities to do it — our job is to keep articles about things that have third-party journalistic and scholarly coverage to establish that they're notable, and to not keep articles about things that don't. Bearcat (talk) 14:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you just made that up, "Wikipedia's purpose is to benefit readers by presenting information on all branches of knowledge", "Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing." — Jimmy Wales" so keep going on your powertrip. Jp3333 (talk) 14:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I didn't make anything up, What I said is exactly how it works. Bearcat (talk) 20:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not seeing any evidence of third-party notability. The Kip ^(contribs) 16:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. I don't see sigcov of this local arena here. I think it probably exists somewhere in a newspaper archive, so someone might be able to make an article on this topic, but I don't think we're going to turn it up during this AfD, if ever. Here's the two local news websites: [1], [2]. They're not great. I've just nominated a related article, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scugog Community Recreation Centre. -- asilvering (talk) 01:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Has anyone given consideration to enhancing the Uxbridge, Ontario article with a partial merge/redirect? That article is not particularly well organised, but coverage of this Arena could fit in the Attractions section, providing something of an WP:ATD. AllyD (talk) 07:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relising to consider suggestion of a possible redirect or merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Uxbridge, Ontario#Attractions. Thanks to AllyD for the suggestion, which in hindsight is obvious. Since there doesn't appear to be any possibility this article will be kept outright, I'll go ahead and merge the content into that article now, so that it's mentioned there. -- asilvering (talk) 21:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG. A search in google news only finds local routine coverage so WP:AUD applies to. LibStar (talk) 00:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy delete‎. CSD G11 Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brownstones Coffee

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

Local business with only local coverage. Fails WP:GNG and is a WP:ADPROMO. Isaidnoway (talk) 18:16, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 18:31, 6 August 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.

GoldMyne TV

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

Non notable online TV that received only passing mentions in all sources referenced. The claim of winning award does not improve its notably because the award categories are clustered with other supposed winners. Other available sources not cited in the article only give passing mentions in reference to interviews conducted by the subject. But those do not count for notability. Ednabrenze (talk) 08:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 08:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Another of my favorite constant topics which come up here often; Yet Another Non-Notable Nigerian YouTube Music Show®️. Nate • (chatter) 17:08, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nomination. Most of the sources were nothing to write home about. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 18:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The Tv has been awarded 3 times by a notable award ceremony Legendarycharles (talk) 07:24, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: By virtue of the awards won. This is equal to awards won by some entertainment brands in the UK and US. And winning it three times definitely means NCREATIVE or GNG can be satisfied. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This fully sourced award section is an evidence of notability. Best, Reading Beans 09:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also do not understand what the nominated meant by The claim of winning award does not improve its notably because the award categories are clustered with other supposed winners. because winning awards for three years is an evidence of notability. Best, Reading Beans 09:53, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We may be nearing a consensus that these awards establish notability, but it would be useful if a few more voices could weigh in.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 14:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per keep !votes. Seem to narrowly pass GNG. Has also been established platform for local entertainment news. HandsomeBoy (talk) 22:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:06, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Lancaster, Pennsylvania, mayoral election

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

Same as usual mayoral election results. Easily fails WP:NEVENT, Lancaster only has a population of ~60,000. Last mayoral election I will be doing for a while, as I don't want to overbear everything with more articles. Allentown will be next. -1ctinus📝🗨 01:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Pennsylvania. Shellwood (talk) 09:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails WP:NEVENT. Sal2100 (talk) 14:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: due to its failure to meet the standards set by WP:NEVENT. The city in question is small, with less than 60,000 souls. Thus, we need to find sources beyond routine reports before we even start writing. This election, lacking concrete, lasting effects on the people living in the city, and receiving little media attention, likely does not need its own article.--AstridMitch (talk) 17:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer: see concerns at ANI that the AFD !votes by AstridMitch, now blocked, are LLM-aided. Abecedare (talk) 20:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - add to Pennsylvania's state political history. The article's inclusion is a positive, not a negative. Scanlan (talk) 17:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would advise that you read WP:ITSUSEFUL.

"Stating that something is useful in a vacuum does not help assess its encyclopedic value. You need to say why something is useful or useless. This way, other editors can judge whether it's useful and encyclopedic according to Wikipedia's policies. Arguments of something's usefulness, uselessness, or value devoid of further context are not valid or persuasive."

Articles like these lead to hundreds of unmaintainable mayoral election stubs without claims to notability that clog up the site. -1ctinus📝🗨 17:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable city, notable election. Scu ba (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Neither of the "keep" opinions makes an argument as to why this election is notable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Silver (performance artist)

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

Man got wrote up in local papers a few times--this is not enough for notability by our standards. Drmies (talk) 22:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

note: This article was created ten years ago, WP:PRODded, and recently undeleted as a result of user interest at Wikicurious: Editing Wikipedia for Beginners @ Civic Hall; it was just undeleted, and as far as I know no one had time to add anything from the past 10 years to it, nor has the person who asked for its undeletion seem to have made any changes to it yet. I've added a few links just now but I imagine there are more, as he is still getting coverage, both local and national. Was there a lack of WP:BEFORE? Tduk (talk) 23:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There certainly is a lack of clarity in the history, and a paucity of decent references in noteworthy publications. BTW NONE of that is very clear from the history, and I'm wondering if User:GiantSnowman wouldn't have done better to restore it to draft space. As for BEFORE--well, a Google News search really gives no reason to believe this is a notable subject. Drmies (talk) 01:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to draftify. Giant Snowman 19:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This article was essentially just 12 hours old when it was nominated for deletion. And the editor who requested undeletion (User:WillStopUrThemeSong) hasn't even had a chance to expand it yet (disclosure: I was with Tduk at the same edit-a-thon event and also encouraged the user to do this, they appear to be a perfectly good faith editor who knows about secondary sources etc. and thought they existed). This nomination seems premature - a notability tag and an encouragement to the restoring editor to make sure they get to improving the article would have been better. (Maybe this is an argument to have restored the article to draft space first, but eh, given that it was in the mainspace before and prods are overturned on essentially any objection, I think the direct restoral to mainspace is fine.) See Wikipedia:Don't demolish the house while it's still being built. SnowFire (talk) 23:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- SnowFire, the history does not reflect that. Drmies (talk) 01:05, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - My statement is correct. The article was formerly at Matthew Silver and was deleted for 10 years from 2014-2024, you can see this in the logs. If you had clicked on WillStopUrThemeSong's contributions, you could see User_talk:GiantSnowman#Matthew_Silver_Article_Restoration where WillStopUrThemeSong requested undeletion so the article could be expanded. Wikipedia isn't a job, it's completely unreasonable to expect that a user requesting this kind of undeletion be ready to pounce within the hour on the article after undeletion to make the desired upgrades and expansion - it's out of a requesting user's hands when precisely the deleting admin will restore the prod. Hypothetically someone requesting undeletion of a prod could have FA-level, perfectly cited content available, but them not editing it in immediately on a Sunday doesn't mean anything. SnowFire (talk) 01:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Also, on the "12 hours" part - GiantSnowman restored at 06:41 UTC, and you nominated for AFD at 18:48. That simply isn't enough time, especially when the requestor has not made an intervening edit. Like I suggested above, if you thought the article was still deficient, a notability tag would have been a more reasonable way to express this concern, which would allow the requestor time to actually update the article. SnowFire (talk) 01:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: With the links Tduk added, I feel this is a WP:GNG pass now with enough significant coverage, including some national. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 23:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The most recent link was a "know your meme" link from 2017. Drmies (talk) 01:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I added some more recent sources; really I was trying to do as little work as possible as this article was revived as part of an editing event, and I wanted it to be used as to encourage a newtime editor and educate on how to bring an article's quality up. Tduk (talk) 02:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Seems he's still an artist [3], but that doesn't prove notability here. The sourcing used in the article is about what I can find, the Rolling Stone piece being the best one. Interesting bit of local history, but I don't see GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 03:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Entertainment, New Jersey, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could this article be Draftified? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:36, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Could be draftified, but still leaning towards delete, because even if it is draftified, it may still not meet WP:SIGCOV; the sources still do not seem to independent and reliable enough, based on RS Noticeboard Archives. Prof.PMarini (talk) 10:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Describing someone as "a man who runs around NYC in his underwear saying and doing radical things" covers at least 8-10% of the city's population, and the numbers are often much higher during the summer. Any particular underwear-based street-performing radical-saying individual would need more in-depth reliable and verifiable sources than what's listed in the article. Alansohn (talk) 12:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've added even more sources. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 16:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Matthew Silver is a well-known artist and is covered by major media. His street performances and media presence meet wp:p standards for notability. Yakov-kobi (talk) 08:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I feel that with the more recent, less local sources, which are about him specifically, the article is more substantial than when it was nominated. Tduk (talk) 11:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. My previous comment was more procedural that the article should have had more time before being AFD'd, so on the merits... I think Bsoyka's additions suggest that this is certainly on the keepable side. Maybe running around in underwear is silly, but if the press sees fit to write it up, that's still meeting WP:N, and Rolling Stone shows this isn't just local papers (but local papers count too!). SnowFire (talk) 14:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The current version of the article shows sufficient coverage by secondary sources, in particular Rolling Stone producing a documentary short. BrightVamp (talk) 23:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found this too [4], I don't know if it changes my !vote. Still not convinced. Oaktree b (talk) 00:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Does not meet any WP:ARTIST standards like "important figure," "widely cited by peers or successors," or "been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums." A few of the references do not support WP:GNG, like the citation to the user-generated site "Know Your Meme," where the entry[5] on this topic describes itself as "currently being researched & evaluated! You can help confirm this entry by contributing facts, media, and other evidence of notability and mutation." Other sources are largely either local, WP:ROUTINE, or WP:ONEEVENT of getting detained by security. I've been trying to find some justification for how this might almost scrape by WP:GNG, but even if so, GNG is "not a guarantee that a subject merits its own article." Elspea756 (talk) 04:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Road 2 Soulwave

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

Fails WP:NSONG, nothing much to add. Apart from the several unreferenced sections, this article makes no credible claim of importance or significance for the song. The musician himself is non-notable too. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jasën Blu

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

Nothing in this article makes the subject inherently notable, literally. Fails WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:GNG. The sources are run of the mill coverages and PRs for singles and so on. The few others that aren't PRs are promotional puff pieces. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:55, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While @Vanderwaalforces is correct about the status of this article's subject specifically regarding WP:NMUSICIAN, it does seem to fair slightly better by WP:GNG given a number of the citations point back to reliable sources such as major publications. Also, the subject appears to be an up and coming musical act with not very much but nonetheless, a number of verifiable articles citing solo works and in a few more cases, co-citations with notable subjects via creative associations. On a recent edit to this article, I noticed a few bigger publications confirmed hitherto unverified sections, and replaced the citations on the affected section. If the subject is essentially an upcoming musical act gaining decent coverage for its works, a better alternative might be to watch article for a while for any improvement on its adherence to WP:NMUSICIAN, before an outright deletion. Kevtutado (talk) 01:47, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Katoch–Sikh war

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

A few unreliable sources- Ref 1) by Khazan Singh was published in 1914, and the author is not a historian. Ref 8) by Mark Brentnall is a self published source with no information available about the author. Ref 7) by Amarinder Singh, the author is a politician not a historian. In addition, refs 2) and 3) are improperly cited, do not have a page number or a proper url to a page discussing the subject at hand and thus fail WP:V. The remaining sources make only passing mention of this battle/conflicts between Sansar Chand Katoch and Ranjit Singh, and subsequently focus far more on Chand and Ranjit Singh's alliance against the Nepalis; the actual "war" content between the 2 in these books fails WP:SIGCOV by a long shot. The article's information is best suited as a prelude/context in the page Nepal-Sikh war due to the aforementioned proportionality of coverage surrounding the two's alliance. In addition, the creator of the article created numerous low quality pages to inundate Wikipedia with articles aggrandizing his religion's military history.Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Sikhism, and India. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:17, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per nom Raged Pratihar (talk) 08:09, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear opinions from editors with more experience at AFD and, ideally, with this subject area.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anguilla at the 2014 Commonwealth Games

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

Lacking in-depth secondary source coverage. Unnecessary fork. Many of these articles have already been deleted, see AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dominica at the 2010 Commonwealth Games. AusLondonder (talk) 14:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, and Caribbean. AusLondonder (talk) 14:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article is sourced. The previous discussion (which I started) were articles that only stated the country competed, with no other information. Those should be deleted. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Three primary sources? AusLondonder (talk) 14:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you need to review what primary sources are. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:41, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here are other sources and the nominator clearly did not do a WP:BEFORE. These all mention Anguilla's appearance at the games. Together it should be just enough to pass WP:GNG.
[6], [7], [8], [9] and [10], [11] Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong merge to Anguilla at the Commonwealth Games. A bad idea for a standalone article, in that the potential for growth is limited. Geschichte (talk) 17:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a WP:ATD, Id agree (especially for the smaller CGAs) Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is a stronger consensus for a Merge. The article being discussed could easily overwhelm the skimpy target article, Anguilla at the Commonwealth Games.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign non-political endorsements

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign non-political endorsements, 2016

Articles for deletion/List of Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign non-political endorsements (2nd nomination)

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

Sub- and sub-sub-pages of List of Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign political endorsements, which was tied up with the 2017 deletion discussion. These pages stand out among Presidential candidate endorsement articles as excessively forked, hugely reliant on WP:SOCIALMEDIA sources (WP:PSTS) and thus not establishing notability (WP:TRIVIA). I am also nominating the following related pages:

U-Mos (talk) 11:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 12:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a valid page split. The other lists would be too big if this verifiable information were added there. --Enos733 (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not suggesting a merger; very little of these pages meets notability through their reliance on WP:PRIMARYSOURCEs, and what's left would take considerable effort to extricate. U-Mos (talk) 18:41, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I said this in 2017 I am not sure Wikipedia is the proper place to document lists of endorsements for political candidates (Notable endorsements covered in multiple independent sources, probably as part of the main campaign page). Is AfD the proper place to hold this discussion, though? I still feel that AFD is not the right forum to determine whether we should retain all endorsements. That said, the main topic Clinton 2016 endorsements is notable, and it can be assumed that a page split (based on size) can inherit the notability from the primary topic. - Enos733 (talk) 19:50, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Keep - 2002crash1 (talk) 02:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note It's come to my attention that there is a content guideline at Wikipedia:Political endorsements, with endemic violations of points 2 and 3 of the inclusion criteria for individual endorsements apparent on the pages here proposed for deletion. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Kamala Harris 2024 presidential campaign endorsements. U-Mos (talk) 13:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Content can be fixed through normal editing. - Enos733 (talk) 03:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Easier to WP:BLOWITUP in my opinion. U-Mos (talk) 06:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 14:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it violates Wikipedia:Political endorsements. If such a ridiculous result can be somehow justified based on the current text of the guidelines, then the guideline text needs to be revised. I cannot find any list of endorsements in WP:RS that even remotely resemble this one in scope. Therefore, most (99%?) of mentions in these lists are WP:UNDUE. --Викидим (talk) 22:51, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Secret Road Music Services

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

Article about a media company, which I believe meets the following reasons for deletion:

#7, lack of reliable sources; #8, notability. I cannot find evidence that this company is notable. When looking for outside coverage, most of what my search turned up was either material on the company's website, LinkedIn pages, or job listings. Of the page's nine current references, four are primaries from the company's own site. In the first third-party reference, the Time article, the company isn't mentioned until more than halfway through the article. The ONErpm link is dead. The Television Academy link contains only a passing mention, and the Rolling Stone article doesn't mention the company by name at all. The Billboard article does focus on the company but looks suspiciously like a press release, and Billboard hasn't been assessed one way or the other in the list of reliable sources.
#1, copyright violation. The history section in the article is a thin, uncredited reword of an advertising blurb in the company's website and also used elsewhere, such as here. While there's a reference in the first paragraph, the reference doesn't include that text or clarify its origins.
There's also apparent conflict of interest; most of the article was written by a handful of accounts that have done little other editing, and then only on pages about artists connected to this company. One of the accounts, LynnGrossman, is also the name of the company owner, as given in the Time article (on page 3).
Additionally, if this page is deleted, the redirect Secret road should also be deleted.

Altogether, the impression I get is of an article that was written as advertising by people connected to the subject. Additionally, the company's website promo copy seems to have been paraphrased in the article body without context or attribution. And, even if the page were rewritten completely by outsiders, the company still isn't notable. Moonreach (talk) 16:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, Management, Australia, California, New York, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result was speedy keep‎. Nomination withdrawn. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:04, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Fifth Commandment (TV series)

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. Note that says it can be expanded by German article isn't relevant as there are no useful citations in that version that supports notability. The other 2 languages are similar, no citations that can support notability. DonaldD23 talk to me 16:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Germany. DonaldD23 talk to me 16:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Italian page has FOUR references that can clearly support notability! (+1 in a blog), including a full in-depth article in the Frankfurter Allgemeine!!! I deproDed the page (today) and indicated it was improvable....A redirect should have been considered anyway. Always should (before a PROD, before an AfD) if one has no time or will to check the sources. A See also on the page offered an obvious target. And I have only checked the other Wikipedias...... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: see page. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn. User Mushy Yank has compelling additions/notations that have changed my opinion on notability. DonaldD23 talk to me 00:50, 7 August 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.

The Chinese Puzzle (TV series)

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

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 16:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United Kingdom. DonaldD23 talk to me 16:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Brian_Finch#Career: but I am pretty sure sources exist (I didn't even look; no time). I deproded the page (today; same nomnator) ~~and indicated it could be improved or redirected, if I remember well~~. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC) (I didn't remember well my deproD edit summary; edited; see below-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:12, 7 August 2024 (UTC))[reply]
You comment on deprod was "Not uncontroversial", nothing at all about improving or redirecting. Since it was deprodded, I felt that a discussion on notability was better than outright redirecting anyway. DonaldD23 talk to me 23:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, my bad, I hadn't checked and was trusting my memory, which indeed failed me. If you think an AfD was better, sure. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Godenu

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. Some of the sources linked in the article (like the first and third) don't even mention "Godenu". The fourth source mentions Godenu only once, as the "Gbi-Godenu Volta Region IFAD/SCIMP Project", seemingly a different thing. The second source does mention Godenu, but it's pretty brief. Other sources linked aren't reliable or aren't independent. I can find mentions of Godenu, like in this article, but that's it. toweli (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility, Geography, and Ghana. toweli (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ntractive

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

No establishment of notability Amigao (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. Shellwood (talk) 16:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Software, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Page had been overwritten by an IP contributor to talk about an entirely different company. I have since reverted all edits since that point. @Amigao, not sure if you want to take a look at the restored article for whether that meets notability standards or not. Ham tech person 19:07, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1977 Allentown mayoral election

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

Okay, this will be thorough on this one, since lots of these mayoral election deletions have ended as trainwrecks for me. This article is a vialation of WP:NEVENT, as it fails to have significant lasting coverage that fails to qualify. THERE IS NO AUTOMATIC NOTABILITY FOR MAYORAL ELECTIONS, as shown here, here, here, here, and here of articles of similar size or larger to Allentown.

A quick WP:BEFORE fails to find any significant lasting coverage as well on Google or ProQuest.

Now, it looks like the article is long, so it must have good sources? Not to establish notability. Let's see if any of these sources match the description of "An event is presumed to be notable if it has lasting major consequences or affects a major geographical scope, or receives significant non-routine coverage that persists over a period of time. Coverage should be in multiple reliable sources with national or global scope." per WP:EVENT.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:1ctinus
https://www.mcall.com/2016/10/14/frank-fischl-decorated-air-force-pilot-and-former-allentown-mayor-dies-at-89/	~		Local obituary, mentions the election for a single sentence	✘ No
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/284052961/	~		WP:ROUTINE mill coverage about a TV program/debate	✘ No
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/280057542/	~	?	WP:PRIMARY	✘ No
https://www.upi.com/Archives/1981/08/12/Political-contribution-from-the-grave/1905366436800/			No coverage at all? The citation says "Daddona's unsuccessful 1969 campaign", not 1977. Either way, its barely lasting coverage, just an offhand sentence in a UPI article.	✘ No
https://www.mcall.com/2004/12/12/whatever-became-of-former-allentown-mayor-frank-fischl/			Scope of the coverage of the election in the article is "Fischl beat out incumbent Joe Daddona. Daddona later succeeded Fischl, who didn’t seek a second term.". While it is lasting, this is not significant.	✘ No
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/283995190/			NOT ABOUT THE ELECTION, BUT ABOUT FISCH DECLINING TO RERUN	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

If deletion seems too much, I propose two alternatives:

Merge all the Allentown mayoral election articles for future maintainability and navigability
(which is better in my opinion). Redirect to Frank Fischl, which most of the coverage seems to be on.

Before I end, a quick note to administrators and voters: please remember to use actual Wikipedia policy instead of using or endorsing arguments like "I like Pennsylvania history, so this must be important" or "this is useful information". These are both arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Wikipedia is not a database, or an indiscriminate collection of information. I am limiting this to one article at a time to avoid a trainwreck nomination. -1ctinus📝🗨 19:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on precedent you can't just delete one of the Allentown elections. you'd have to delete all of them. Scu ba (talk) 03:26, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m trying to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK and a procedural close. This happened previously -1ctinus📝🗨 04:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still doesn't change the fact that as an Allentown election, it is notable enough to warrant a page. You'd have to challenge Allentown, the third largest city in Pennsylvania, as not being notable enough to have it's election pages exist. Scu ba (talk) 00:15, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scu ba: I don't agree with that at all. It is appropriate to evaluate each election article on its own merits. AusLondonder (talk) 15:04, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
regardless of it's current citations, Allentown is the third largest city in Pennslyvania and as due to this it's elections are notable enough to warrant a page. should we go and delete the 2009, 1997, 1993 or really any pre 21st century buffalo election pages? Deleting election pages for major municipalities breaks precedent. Scu ba (talk) 00:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I listed articles that clearly show that there is no precedent for municipal elections to be inherently notable in the top. -1ctinus📝🗨 00:19, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The elections you listed where for minor cities, such as Fontana, California, which is the 21st largest city in California. Allentown is the 3rd largest city in Pennslyvania. There is no consensus that minor towns elections are notable enough, however, major cities warrant their elections having pages. Scu ba (talk) 00:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fontana CA is still a larger town than Allentown by over 90,000 residents. -1ctinus📝🗨 01:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(and the answer for the Buffalo elections is they probably aren’t notable if they lack significant coverage.) -1ctinus📝🗨 00:35, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. they're notable because they're elections in Buffalo, the 2nd largest city in NY. Scu ba (talk) 00:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which policy states that an election is notable automatically because it’s a large city? There is none to my knowledge. -1ctinus📝🗨 01:02, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No jurisdiction gets a free pass from notability requirements. AusLondonder (talk) 15:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide University Liberal Club

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

Fails WP:ORGCRIT as lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Trivial mention in the media in connection with other people or events, but lacking the in-depth coverage necessary. Seems to have been created largely for advertising. AusLondonder (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Conservatism, Organizations, Politics, and Australia. AusLondonder (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - coverage is what I'd expect from any university club, the majority of which do not pass notability. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 00:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gabardine (band)

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. There's a brief biography of the band on AllMusic, it's mentioned in a review of another band's album ("Bemberger, Hughes and Peterson also played together in an obscure band called Gabardine, which released one EP before disbanding in 1998.") and there's another description here (I have no idea if Hard Noise is reliable). toweli (talk) 15:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Nebraska. toweli (talk) 15:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EV Grieve

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

Hyper-local neighborhood blog fails WP:GNG. Only reliable source providing WP:SIGCOV is Curbed (itself a real estate blog). Other sources are themselves WP:SELFPUBLISHED blogs or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of the subject. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This subject has a single reliable, in-depth source (Curbed, which is currently owned by New York magazine). There is no other in-depth coverage of this blog in reliable sources. Basically it's a neighborhood blog in the vein of West Side Rag or ilovetheupperwestside, rather than an actual publication with significant coverage. Epicgenius (talk) 17:33, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Ripton

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

Non-notable rugby player, sources are all routine coverage or borderline-primary sources ("a history of the club"), no evidence of international play so fails WP:NSPORTS and WP:GNG. Primefac (talk) 14:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Sports, Rugby league, Rugby union, and England. Primefac (talk) 14:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks significant coverage. Mn1548 (talk) 09:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have any of the sources been looked into, or a newspaper search been done? He played well over 100 games for the Hull Kingston Rovers, a top-tier team. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semantics and Pragmatics

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

Non-notable journal. Three sources are listed, two of them not independent. The third one shows that this jourl is not listed in any selective database. WP:BEFORE does not unearth additional independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG, hence: delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:22, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 14:22, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Articles in this journal are cited with remarkable frequency for this subfield, so this easily passes criterion 2 of WP:NJOURNALS. Botterweg14 (talk) 16:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glossa Psycholinguistics

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

Non-notable new journal, perhaps a case of WP:TOOSOON. Three sources are listed, none of them independent. Not listed in any selective database. WP:BEFORE does not unearth additional independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG, hence: delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:13, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. I can see the case for WP:TOOSOON, and if that ends up being the consensus I would want to move the article to draft space instead of outright deleting it. However, my judgment is that the papers in this journal have already garnered enough citations (and, FWIW, media coverage) to satisfy Criterion 2. Botterweg14 (talk) 16:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of NCAA Division II independents football records

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

A consensus emerged at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of NCAA Division III independents football records that a list like this fails WP:NLIST and WP:NOTDIRECTORY, because this is a group of loosely-related teams that are not in conferences. A merge to a different article would also be difficult for undue weight issues, as expressed in the previous AfD. Eagles 24/7 (C) 13:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and American football. Eagles 24/7 (C) 13:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I didn't participate in the DIII AfD, but I think "delete" was there and is here the correct result. The individual component templates serve a useful purpose in the annual Division II season articles (e.g., 2012 NCAA Division II football season), but I don't see sufficient commonality to warrant collecting them all in an additional list article. Cbl62 (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LM358

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

A common commercial op amp. In my opinion it does not meet the Notability criteria to warrant its own article. Did not find sufficient independent coverage. It is mentioned but not in depth. As opposed to the 741, which has evident historical significance, the LM358 is not particularly special or impactful in electronics literature. Alan Islas (talk) 13:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My main issue with deleting LM358 is that it's a widespread, industry-standard "jellybean" part - they are everywhere, source-able from multiple manufacturers, used in places ranging from audio applications (now obsolete?) but also motion and light sensors, power supplies etc. Perhaps it's so common that it's invisible!

EEVBlog video "The TOP 5 Jellybean OPAMP's" which mentions LM358 right off the bat - "they specifically call it an Industry-Standard op-amp, because it pretty much is"
"Two commonly used op-amp ICs, the LM324 and LM358, have been the go-to choice for engineers and hobbyists alike"
"The ubiquitous LM324 / LM358 / LM321 ... TS321 op-amp family ... who has not used one of these in a design .. ?".

Even the reference on List of LM-series integrated circuits states "Several generations of pin-compatible descendants of the original parts have since become de facto standard electronic components."

I don't know if there's enough "real" sources available to keep this, but as ICs go there's more in this world than, say, 68030s...

Some options might be to expand this article - talking about its ubiquity rather than its characteristics perhaps - or else merge this in Operational amplifier (a new category of "other historically significant opamps"?), or spin it into a general article of historically significant opamps.

Note that there is also the LM324, a quad-channel op-amp in a similar category, and the LM321 (single-channel version). Neither of these have an article, though. Hornpipe2 (talk) 15:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
consider WikiProject Deletion sorting/Engineering as well Hornpipe2 (talk) 19:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Che' Jones

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

Fails WP:BIO. The only significant source I can find is a local Las Vegas TV station article (he's apparently a Las Vegas resident). The article's creator, User:Chej5, is an WP:SPA, with edits only on this article, so WP:COI is highly likely. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, Nevada, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This is all I find [12], not sure that's enough for notability. Rest of the sourcing used isn't helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 00:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grant Gallagher

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

Fails GNG Dougal18 (talk) 12:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 12:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MD Bank

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

Article was boldly created by a now blocked PAID editor after I had declined it at AFC for lacking reliable sources. After doing some searching I still don't find sources to satisfy WP:GNG. Nobody (talk) 12:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Organizations, and Myanmar. Nobody (talk) 12:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete per WP:G5 Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:33, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Just tag it with speedy deletion under WP:G5 Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete per WP:G5 Felicia (talk) 14:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

G5 doesn't apply here because the user created and moved the article to mainspace before they were blocked. G5 usually only applies to pages created by sockpuppets, and there is no evidence of that here. C F A 💬 16:07, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fails NCORP. Found a few press releases under their previous name and that's about it. C F A 💬 16:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lilingayon, Bukidnon

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

This article fails WP:NPLACE as it lacks WP:SIGCOV only WP:TRIVIALMENTION. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also Nominating: The following with the same reason as above:
I also nominate the category where I get all this place, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 August 6#Category:Barangays of Valencia, Bukidnon
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:47, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural note, the three other articles have not been tagged yet. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Orr (footballer)

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

Fails GNG. None of the sources provide SIGCOV of him and I couldn't find any online. Dougal18 (talk) 12:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 12:49, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dean Hawkshaw

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

Hawkshaw fails GNG with a lack of SIGCOV. Dougal18 (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 12:49, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't see nothing wrong with the article, a full professional Scotland footballer with good basic coverage. Passes WP:BASIC in my view. Govvy (talk) 15:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Third party sourcing. WP:GNG passes.BabbaQ (talk) 16:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per above. Svartner (talk) 07:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Finn Ecrepont

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

Fails GNG, lacks SIGCOV. Dougal18 (talk) 11:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 12:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of disparaging nicknames for settlements

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

This should be deleted per WP:NLIST as "List of disparaging nicknames for settlements" is not notable as a set. There has been insufficient discussion of the set in reliable sources which establishes its notability as a set. Also per WP:NOTDICTIONARY "Wikipedia is not a dictionary, or a usage or jargon guide". TarnishedPath^talk 11:27, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Lists. TarnishedPath^talk 11:27, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leading towards Weak Keep per WP:GAZETTEER but only weak as it may violates WP:NOTDICTIONARY Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 13:03, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural note: This really should have been nominated for deletion before Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of disparaging nicknames for settlements in the United States. I recommend any potential closer consider the outcome (or lack thereof) of that discussion before taking action here. --BDD (talk) 19:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This page had a very specific and unusual origin. Disparaging nicknames for places kept coming up at WP:RFD, and there was a lack of consensus on how to treat them. While redirects don't have to be neutral, pointing them to the places seemed unsatisfying because there typically wasn't any information about the name, which meant there was potential for reader confusion. The result was this list, where context and references could be provided for the names. Consensus can change, of course, but deletion risks reintroducing that problem to RFD. --BDD (talk) 19:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kugelmugel

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

No clear indication of notability, does not pass WP:GNG. All search for references show cursory mentions in "List of Micronations" or "List of places to go in Vienna" Soni (talk) 11:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Soni (talk) 11:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kugelmugel was mentioned in 'Atlas Obscura' book. In german wiki there is a section 'Reactivation' and reference to viennese 'Kronen Zeitung' of 30th May 2004, that it has 'opened its borders with Austria'. Might be more notable than most of micronations. Kolijars (talk) 21:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh, not 2004 but 2024 it is :) -> Kronen Zeitung, Wien-Ausgabe vom 30. Mai 2024, Seite 29. Kolijars (talk) 21:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confy

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

Article subject does not show up in any online searches except for YouTube, social media, and one website newtimes.co.rw. My previous edit was to remove almost all of the article sources (almost all pointing to New Times articles), which were simply puff pieces and did not factually support anything in the article. Celjski Grad (talk) 11:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Rwanda. Shellwood (talk) 12:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas, Indiana

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

All that's here is a farm whose three long barns (I'm guessing for hogs?) haven't changed in a half-century, and the south end of a passing siding. It is the latter that is likely the cause for the name. Mangoe (talk) 09:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 09:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly just a siding or other rail point. The name does not appear on any map I can find until 1958: [13] and it was never more than a building by the tracks. There was a Thomas Bluff Road nearby, but big deal. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of fossil sites

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

Like the recent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of archaeological sites by continent and age, this is just too broad for a single list article. Looking at the article, it isn't even clear what a "fossil site" even is. Many of the listed iems are geological formations, which are typically geographically extensive and therefore not "sites". Listing fossil sites by region is already effectively done by categories (e.g Category:Paleontological sites). Hemiauchenia (talk) 08:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Lists. Hemiauchenia (talk) 08:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep You only list those notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, it a valid navigational list, with more information than a category can have, so more useful. Category:Paleontological sites exist so perhaps a rename is in order to list of Paleontological sites. Dream Focus 16:14, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Dream Focus, it's a good navigational list. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 21:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep All of the arguments from the previous discussion about deleting this list still apply (I can’t seem to track down the archive entry for that deletion discussion, despite having reread it least week? Now, the same search brings me to this current discussion. I think the previous one was in 2017). My summary of that and past talk page discussions:

This list is far more useful than a category or set of categories because it has more information than categories can include.
This list can be sorted in multiple ways (primary notability, age, continent or country). From a geology perspective, sorting by time period is often more important/interesting than sorting by region. Some people sort by notability or use the tags to find types of sites. If we split it up, we have to maintain lists or categories for all of combinations of sorts and sub-sorts. (And then we get to argue about where to put the divisions between time periods in the past couple million years).
We have, in fact, made a solid attempt at defining a fossil site. The reason entire formations are listed is because some formations outcrop at many sites in a general region and listing every outcrop is neither feasible nor particularly useful. This has been discussed in the Talk at some length and is mentioned in the list intro. Ideally such formations would each have a listed type locality or primary site, but no one has yet done the research to add those to every previously listed formation. (Sometimes these localities are already in the primary article for a formation, but no one has yet added them here.)
If we actually apply the inclusion criteria discussed in Talk to delete list entries (rather than just to new additions) the list will get tidier. Deleting the list itself would remove a valuable and popular navigational tool.

Elriana (talk) 03:44, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of sports teams named for the phoenix

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

Similar to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports teams named Trojans or Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_sports_teams_named_Spartans, this article lacks any sources discussing the grouping and as such WP:NLIST is not met here. A WP:BEFORE didn't reveal anything that could establish notability either. Let'srun (talk) 21:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 21:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, notability lacking. Dmoore5556 (talk) 00:51, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; this looks like textbook WP:OR. Left guide (talk) 04:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep maybe turning it into a disambig. Firstly, it's different from Trojans or Spartans because phoenix club is a separate concept in sports. As a result, there is a significant amount of clubs named Phoenix in one of many spellings (Phoenix, Feniks, Fénix, Phönix), which at least creates a legitimate disambiguation. I don't mind converting it into a disambig but it is too long to be merged in an already huge main disambig Phoenix — NickK (talk) 07:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename ~~Phoenix (sports)~~ or Phoenix (sports teams). The entries properly belong in Phoenix, but as NickK has pointed out, the latter dab page is already very long, so WP:SPLIT applies. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Convert to DAB per Clarityfiend at either title proposed by this user. Fails WP:NLIST due to lack of coverage of these teams as a set or group, but could serve navigational purposes. Frank Anchor 15:55, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to the proposal. Let'srun (talk) 16:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and convert to DAB. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Clarityfiend that this would make the DAB page for Phoenix (disambiguation) pretty long, so I think this should be called Phoneix (sports team). voorts (talk/contributions) 21:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional discussion relating to the disambiguation proposal would be helpful in attaining consensus for a particular outcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:38, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, list cruft. I don't think a DAB is useful here or else it would've been created before. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Traumnovelle: This page was a part of a DAB until 2011 when it became big enough to be split into a separate page — NickK (talk) 23:30, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still don't believe a DAB is useful here per Left guide's comment. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That it is OR? Sports teams are often referred to by their city. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also disagree with the DAB proposal because this is an unnatural title for such a page; it seems unlikely for readers to use this as a plausible base search term. Everything can and should be appropriately handled at places like Phoenix (disambiguation)#Sports and Sports in Phoenix. Left guide (talk) 04:45, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, or convert to disambiguation. This was split out of a dab page. I do not think WP:CRUFTCRUFT is a good rationale. jp×g 🗯️ 06:24, 1 August 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) 06:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and recycle it into a DAB. Phoenix (disambiguation) is too long. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dugga Elo

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

Fails WP:NSONG and WP:GNG. Mentions, an interview, and other unreliable sources. CNMall41 (talk) 06:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 06:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - page has enough coverage of these sources that WP:GNG passes.
103.102.136.170 (talk) 12:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't check for more sources because I don't know Indian media well enough, but I can say that this is clearly not a GNG pass as is. I'll refrain from voting in case more can be found, but as is redirecting to Monali Thakur discography#Non-film songs would make the most sense to me. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Enough coverage" speaks to quantity, not quality. Can IP point to the sources that are considered reliable and significant to prove WP:NSONG?--CNMall41 (talk) 18:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant guideline would be WP:NEWSORGINDIA. An example would be this reference which based on this recent discussion cannot be used to establish notability. No byline or editorial oversight. Outside of NEWSORGINDIA, another reference would be this which is from the creator of the show. Then this which is an interview so not independent. Being that this would need to meet WP:SONG, I do not see any reference that shows that it 1) is on a national chart, 2) won a significant award, or 3) been independently released by numerous artists. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 stock market decline

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

This is just plain economic news, and even as economic news goes it's not notable. The decline was almost cancelled the next day (I would have nominated this even without the bounce). Market volatility, especially over the summer, is routine. I also want to point to the discussion on the article's talk page. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 06:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete: WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NEVENT. ElijahPepe would do well to not rush to make these news articles, looking at his talk page. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 06:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete: WP:NOTNEWS, recentism, original research. There is no time perspective yet to decide wether this is a major and historical event or just one more market volatility episode. Not encyclopedic and hasty article, imo. PedroAcero76 (talk) 08:14, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and Economics. Shellwood (talk) 09:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE- This article is unnecessary at the moment, as there hasn't been a significant downturn to warrant a title like "2024 Stock Market Decline." The term could refer to any minor or major decline this year globally. It also appears to be politically motivated. John Bois (talk) 10:06, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but Rename In Japan, it was the largest one-day point decline in its history. We should reduce systemic bias in Wikipedia. If this accident is regarded as important in some countries, it can get a notability. Sharouser (talk) 10:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NEVENT. This page is incredibly biased on the US. It also is not news, the stock has mostly recovered so there is no reason that this is a page on Wikipedia yet. An argument for completely redoing this page is if you focus on Japan however stocks have recovered so far so I see no need. I believe that this page should be deleted and if the page creator has a history of this maybe a look into his past should be done. Beppi121 (talk) 11:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition the title of the article encompasses the entirety of 2024 while only talking about early august. If by some miracle this article is kept it needs to be renamed to specify the event. Beppi121 (talk) 11:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOTNEWS. This was made far too hastily -- a single-day decline doesn't need its own page. Estreyeria (talk) 13:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOTNEWS. This article was created prematurely, poorly titled even if it was valid, and likely created for political reasons — early edits include political language/blaming. Jsknoll (talk) 13:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It is WAY too soon for this article, if at all. The stocks could increase as they are extremely unpredictable. Felicia (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Stated WP:TOPIC is far too broad for WP:GNG, and the article doesn't even describe a correction, let alone a notable one — at least WP:NOTJUSTYET. Despite giving this article some time and attention, its suffers from incredibly poor and spotty quality, especially as world markets have broadly recovered a considerable portion of Monday's losses throughout Tuesday, weakening any potential for broader narrative. As for the Japanese decline specifically, it currently has a mention on List of stock market crashes and bear markets where it fits better and is of somewhat more noteworthiness. --Tim Parenti (talk) 15:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I originally found this article from List of largest daily changes in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, and was shocked that it was given its own article. Jsknoll (talk) 16:32, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it is way too soon to delete, or in fact to determine if this is not developing into a really prominent event. IHaveBecauseOfLocks (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is precisely why it shouldn't've been created in the first place. In the U.S., the current "dip" is not significantly different than what was experienced in late May 2024. August 5th was notably bad (and worth including in a list), but there is no evidence (yet) of a "2024 stock market decline." At the moment, the market is up in the past six months, YTD, and nearly even over the past month. Jsknoll (talk) 16:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Wikipedia is not in the business of holding onto speculative articles that could later prove prominent or notable, per WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Plenty of global market events of similar scale do not have their own article. For now, this is easily kept to relevant mentions on relevant articles. If it later becomes a significant long-term phenomenon like, say, 2022 stock market decline (which occurred over most of that entire year), there will be plenty of reliable sourcing for an article then. --Tim Parenti (talk) 16:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete market's already recovered about to where it was two days ago, fails NEVENT and NOTNEWS. The Kip ^(contribs) 17:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This article violates WP:NOTNEWS and, as such, relies entirely on breaking news sources. Stock prices largely recovered within the next day, but even if they had not, the article—at least, as currently written—doesn't demonstrate any long-term significance for this topic. Epicgenius (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, a clear violation of WP:NOTNEWS. The creator of this article has chronic issues with creating pages far too soon. Esolo5002 (talk) 18:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait: Not to say this is a super notable event, but it is a major change and we should wait to see how the market performs the next few days. LuxembourgLover (talk) 02:11, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after reading the article, I don't think it's substantial enough to justify its existence. Mateusmatsuda (talk) 03:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clearly fails NOTNEWS, a short burst of coverage is not sufficient for notability either (per GNG or NEVENT). Type of article may have been better suited for Wikinews and only if it developed into a long term market effect, creating the article on en.wiki would be appropriate. --Masem (t) 03:30, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:TOOSOON. So far it looks like a short flash crash. --Minoa (talk) 06:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warwick Slow

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

A case of WP:BLP1E. LibStar (talk) 12:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 12:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article should not be deleted as it documents a historical event in New Zealand history. The failure of New Zealand security forces to protect an event with a head of state was national news and prompted discussions between New Zealand and the UK around security arrangements. Ashok.fernandez (talk) 11:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it's about an event then the article should be renamed. However, I don't think it meets WP:EVENT. LibStar (talk) 02:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this person isn't notable enough for a biographical article. As for the incident itself, I can only find 2 articles about it, which depict it as a failed gatecrashing attempt with minor repercussions. It seems there are few viable sources to support the claim it was a historical event, or really much of anything at all. Melonbob (talk) 06:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the person is WP:BLP1E. If the event is notable then the article needs to be refocused. Celjski Grad (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Henna Singal

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

Does not pass the notability guidelines for WP:MUSIC. Released one album with a few singles that did not chart. Not via a major label. Karst (talk) 11:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Karst (talk) 11:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Medwyn Goodall

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

This appears to be a vanity page for a musician. While his body of work is extensive, I cannot find any substantial online coverage of him to fulfill WP:BASIC or WP:MUSICBIO. The second reference states that he has topped the UK music charts twice, but this appears to be a fanzine of questionable reliability and I can't find any mention of him at the official chart website. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 08:32, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've searched the official charts database, and I agree with the nominator, I am unable to find evidence of charting (though potentially it could be so far back in time to not be available online), including under his alternate name. However - there is a WP:RSMUSIC Allmusic staff bio available, which is both non-trivial coverage and confirms gold-certification. Potentially with more verification and coverage this may be a keep. ResonantDis_tortion 13:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fenercell

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

Notability is not found; there are also no reliable sources Dirubii Olchoglu (talk) 08:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 10:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:05, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Is only a redirect in the Turkish Wikipedia. Geschichte (talk) 12:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Fenerbahçe S.K. as per WP:ATD, sourcing fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 10:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Only the first 2 sentences are about Fenercell; the remainder is about Avea (now part of Türk Telekom) and a broad discussion about mobile networks in Türkiye. In that state, it would have been better titled as Avea. Or reduced to a 2 sentence stub on Fenercell, which would sit with the redirect on the tr.wiki article. Regarding the "Fenercell" branding, that uses other providers such as A1 Telekom Austria Group elsewhere [14]. AllyD (talk) 13:36, 6 August 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 redirect‎ to Marc Douglas Berardo. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further on Tomorrow

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

I couldn't find sources to add confirming it meets WP:NALBUM / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:43, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Connecticut and Rhode Island. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Marc Douglas Berardo: I also found no additional coverage. In fact, I found nothing that suggests that Bernardo himself is notable, and I launched a separate AfD for his page. If that page is kept, this should be redirected there; if that page is deleted then the redirect will be speedied. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:03, 16 July 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) 04:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, Marc Douglas Berardo may not be the best target article as it's up for an AFD deletion discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, still waiting to see if redirect target article is Kept.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:45, 6 August 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.

Homogeneity and heterogeneity

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

nothing in common except the name; the main topic is already split: Homogeneous and heterogeneous mixtures. fgnievinski (talk) 04:32, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve H&H as mixtures may indeed already be a section elsewhere; but that’s not the only interpretation. Budding mathematicians might be interested in the mathematical meanings of H&H, and for them I’d like to see the current short paragraph expanded rather than swept away altogether. Nick Levine (talk) 15:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. An important distinction for binary relations. — Rgdboer (talk) 20:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catan (2008 video game)

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

Got a GameSpot review - that appears to be all there is with regards to significant coverage. Due to this, fails WP:GNG. Anyone searching for sources should not confuse it with the different 2007 and 2009 games of the same name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Catan#Video_games. Not sure why this needed to go to AfD, given there is a perfect alternative to deletion redirect target. Doesn't meet WP:GNG and I couldn't find much in my searches. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 08:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moved this to Merge per below, my comment stays the same. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 22:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Catan#Video_games. Two short reviews by PlayStation: The Official Magazine: [15] and Play: [16]. Article by Dengeki PlayStation: [17], describes the general Catan gameplay but not the differences in the PS3 version. No critical analysis. I have a hard time seeing how this could be used in the article. Then there's routing news coverage by Wired and Siliconera: [18], [19], [20]. --Mika1h (talk) 08:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Catan#Video games per WP:MERGEREASON. Sergecross73 msg me 10:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2022 Shreveport mayoral election

AfDs for this article:

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

More electioncruft articles, except all of these are in a town that is not even in the top 100 largest towns in the United States. Not notable for the usual reasons, Wikipedia is a political database. Fails the general notability guideline, as all sources are WP:MILL in local news stations or papers. Additionally, no coverage is sustaining, failing WP:NEVENT. I am nominating the following articles as well:

2022 Shreveport mayoral election
2018 Shreveport mayoral election
2014 Shreveport mayoral election
2010 Shreveport mayoral election
2006 Shreveport mayoral election
2002 Shreveport mayoral election
1998 Shreveport mayoral election
1994 Shreveport mayoral election
1990 Shreveport mayoral election — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1ctinus (talk • contribs)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Louisiana. Shellwood (talk) 10:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - I'm struggling with this one. I am mostly persuaded by your argument, however, I am a sucker for well done election articles with good sources, images, graphics, etc. It may be better served at ballotpedia. I think it's worth keeping as a source of accurate information with pretty graphics. My city is a little larger than Shreveport and our mayoral election is on Wikipedia with far less information. I would't want it deleted. Perhaps a faulty reason I'm giving to keep, but I think that it just scrapes by as a source of general encyclopedia information. Bluefist^talk 02:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument against deletion seems to emphasize its inherent importance (WP:ITSIMPORTANT). However, on Wikipedia, importance is determined by significant, independent coverage, and unfortunately, there isn't a rule that makes municipal elections automatically notable.

If you want to merge these all into a list (mayoral elections in Green Bay, Wisconsin), I would be fine with that, but for now, we have an unmaintainable mess of hundreds of these mayoral elections without explaining their significance. -1ctinus📝🗨 11:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of mayors of Shreveport, Louisiana. Other than the 2022 article, the articles are only sourced to primary sources and mostly about candidates without stand-alone articles. The additional coverage of Adrian Perkins and the 2022 election is likely because of editor interest rather than availability of sourcing. And the sources for 2022 are just WP:MILL coverage of candidate entries, endorsements, and results. List of mayors of Shreveport, Louisiana is the only plausible redirect target; it seems reasonable enough as an alternative to deletion. Walsh90210 (talk) 04:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Week keep per bluefist, articles have a decent amount of coverage Microplastic Consumer (talk) 04:40, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Norbert Magosi

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. All the sources provided are primary. A google news search yields nothing. LibStar (talk) 03:26, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Hungary. LibStar (talk) 03:26, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Meets criteria 4 of WP:NMOTORSPORT, being a multiple national champion. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:54, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SpacedFarmer, all sportspeople must meet SPORTCRIT #5 regardless of meeting a sport-specific criterion. Where is the SIGCOV? JoelleJay (talk) 21:55, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The same as this amongst others...Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Sakhir Formula 3 round (which I nominated, where are the SIGCOV for these too) SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is not an article on a sportsperson; these are not comparable, especially as bundled noms almost always fail and the keep !voters weren't even arguing to keep on GNG grounds. I don't think the keep arguments were correct there, but that was a completely different situation. JoelleJay (talk) 23:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They were bundled as they have in common is the lack of WP:RS besides a hobbyist newssite. SpacedFarmer (talk) 20:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article, he's covered on three pages of Świat Żużla. That should be checked. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, finding two stories here and here ("Magosi Norbert is one of the most important figures in Hungarian motorsport") wasn't difficult. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:47, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're closer to needing to delete those championship articles than we are to being able to use them as an indication of notability. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 08:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could those participating in this discussion offer their opinions on what should happen with this article? It would be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Bednář

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. Only primary sources provided. LibStar (talk) 02:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Czech Republic. LibStar (talk) 02:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment it might be too soon. I don't see anything other than mentions in event coverage. But there are mentions in event coverage; [21] is the best one I found; [22] [23] are closer to name-drops. Walsh90210 (talk) 03:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Datacube Inc.

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

Article has very little references, and not much information about the company can be found on Google search. AKK700 02:03, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete sounds like WP:PROMO, could not verify the sources used and little information on Google Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scugog Community Recreation Centre

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

Non-notable local arena. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uxbridge Arena and Recreation Centre. asilvering (talk) 01:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Canada. asilvering (talk) 01:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Copying part of my comment from the other AfD: I don't see sigcov of this local arena here. I think it probably exists somewhere in a newspaper archive, so someone might be able to make an article on this topic, but I don't think we're going to turn it up during this AfD, if ever. Here's the two local news websites: [24], [25]. They're not great. -- asilvering (talk) 01:47, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nom comment: a merge to the article on the town was proposed on the Uxbridge AfD and would work for this one too. I went ahead and merged the content in already, so I could withdraw this nom and WP:BLAR the article, but I strongly suspect the BLAR would be reverted, so I'd rather let this AfD play out in full. -- asilvering (talk) 21:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas Messing

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

Could not find any third party coverage to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. The Eurosport source looks like a database. LibStar (talk) 01:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Sweden. LibStar (talk) 01:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, could not find secondary sources that is WP:RS Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 06:02, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've added two sources from separate RS that I believe feature significant coverage of the subject. AlexandraAVX (talk) 15:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blog rally

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

Not a notable term; arguably not a term at all. Other than the Engage With Grace reference, the sources seem to be in-passing usage of the two words next to each other, or not even that. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denver Perfume

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

Likely to fail WP:NCORP. Sourced to interviews, PR/churnalism. KH-1 (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. KH-1 (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:06, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tip the Van

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. toweli (talk) 00:38, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Connecticut. toweli (talk) 00:38, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless someone can find multiple independent reliable sources that devote significant coverage to this band. I couldn't. Cullen328 (talk) 01:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Cullen328. I'm not sure if these are the sources you are looking for, but here are some that I found.

CT Newspaper - Hartford Courant

https://www.courant.com/2019/12/13/tip-the-van-reunion-tour-stopping-at-space-ballroom/

https://www.courant.com/2007/08/02/a-slam-bam-thank-you-to-some-grand-bands/

CT Newspaper - New Haven Register

https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Spring-Heeled-Jack-reunites-Friday-and-Saturday-11600584.php

Archive.org copy of the Vans Warped Tour Site from 2010 listing the band

https://web.archive.org/web/20100415160948/http://www.vanswarpedtour.com/warpedtour/bands.asp

Wikipedia Article Listing the Band Having Played the Vans Warped Tour 3x

https://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=Dmitry Medvedev &lang=en&q=List_of_Warped_Tour_lineups_by_year

Ticket Listing from a CT Music Venue

https://spaceballroom.com/e/tip-the-van-reunion-show--82671932977/

Interview with the Band

https://v13.net/2010/08/interview-with-tip-the-van-singer-nicole-oliva-and-bassist-bryan-howard/

Michigan Newspaper Listing the Band

https://www.mlive.com/entertainment/flint/2010/07/rocker_andrew_wk_returns_to_hi.html

Concert Listings

https://www.concertarchives.org/bands/tip-the-van--2?page=1#concert-table

Concert Review

https://duffguidetoska.blogspot.com/2009/11/duff-gig-review-across-aisle-tip-van.html

If you need more sources to keep this article, I'm happy to keep digging. 137.99.142.26 (talk) 13:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
About the Wikipedia source one, It absolutely does not qualify as reliable source per WP:CIRCULAR Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 01:14, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only source out of those that could possibly contribute to notability is the first one, the others just mention the band or aren't reliable sources. Interviews don't establish notability, although the pre-interview portion has a bit of commentary, so there's that too, I guess. toweli (talk) 01:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, anyone want to look over these sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mustafa Lleshi Street

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

An unsourced article about an unremarkable streets in Tirana, Albania. Google search results are WP:MILL business websites of places on the street. Walsh90210 (talk) 00:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because it is similarly unremarkable, and used to be part of Mustafa Lleshi Street:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Albania. Walsh90210 (talk) 00:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's been 10 years and the article still has no source Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 01:09, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No evidence of notability and no sources added since its creation in 2010. ADifferentMan (talk) 03:49, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article is terribly outdated as the street has been renamed Rruga Alfred Uçi.[26] It also isn't true that it is entirely a pedestrian street. Only part of the street is. In a good case. People tagged it that way yet it can also be considered a living street. This problematic quality and the lack of sources lead to the conclusion that the article should be deleted. gidonb (talk) 21:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Demneri Street should be selectively merged into Xhavit Demneri. Just mention over that there is a street after the late footballer in Tirana as "legacy". Since people missed that above and the conclusion differs, I suggest starting a new AfD after this one closes. gidonb (talk) 22:15, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Collins (speedway rider)

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

Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. A search for sources could not find any third party coverage. LibStar (talk) 00:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and England. LibStar (talk) 00:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete could not find any 2ndary sources talk about it Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 01:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete [27] says the most notable things he did were to win a junior competition at age 15, and having famous relatives. Notability is not inherited. Walsh90210 (talk) 04:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]