Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Yesterday

Recent AfDs:    Today    Yesterday      May 16 (Fri)      May 15 (Thu)      May 14 (Wed)     More... Media   Organisations   Biography   Society   Web   Games   Science   Arts   Places   Indiscern.  Not-Sorted

Purge server cache

RIØT (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not notable band Czarking0 (talk) 23:52, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per WP:BAND or WP:ENT: no major awards, no songs in national charts, not certified gold, haven't won or placed in national competitions or any other notability requisite. No SIGCOV to meet WP:NBIO either. No major part in creating a major work. Maybe WP:TOOSOON — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:47, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Searches showed nothing but self-published things like Soundcloud. Rift (talk) 21:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per WP:BAND, this band does not meet any criteria for notability. Searches on other sources also do not return any websites talk about the popularity of this band. Halley ^{luv Filipino ❤} (Talk) 22:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accident at Lac-Bouchette (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability. Fails WP:EVENT. I'm unable to find sustained significant coverage in English or French. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Canada. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the sixth deadliest traffic accident in Canadian history and the death of 19 people is not a notable event? Many lives and generations were affected by this tragic event, worthy of remembrance. 142.169.16.244 (talk) 01:11, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least merge/redirect to List of deadliest Canadian traffic accidents. I oppose the argument above. Death toll is not notability. However, there are some OK sources. This article needs to be renamed. Mentioned in this article in the Encyclopedia of Canada.... not particularly long, but not passing, and I do think being in a national encyclopedia is a claim to something stronger than a normal book. Also in this academic book [1]. Not particularly long but not passing. There are also many hits on BAnQ numérique (Quebec news archive) past 1993... some is fairly local, so it only moves the needle a bit, but if we have notability establishing sources it would help to build the article. Just a warning for anyone who tries to search BAnQ it has one of the worst search interfaces ever. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No enduring - sorry - impact, fails WP:EVENT per nom. Also WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Álamo bus accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability. Fails WP:EVENT. I'm unable to find sustained significant coverage in English or Spanish except for a single Wordpress blog. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Mexico. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Santa Catarina bus accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability. Fails WP:EVENT. I'm unable to find sustained coverage in English or Portuguese except for passing mentions in the context of other crashes (these crashes are quite common). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Brazil. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Skystone Systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No reliable sources, fails WP:GNG ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 23:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and Canada. ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 23:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SoftAtHome (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No reliable sources, fails WP:GNG ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 23:10, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, and France. ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 23:10, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Nothing that satisfies WP:ORGCRIT. All sources I am finding are routine announcements and mentions (along with Orange Group which could be a potential redirect target). --CNMall41 (talk) 18:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hrvatsko kulturno vijeće (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Looking at English sources, there is only passing mentions. Serbo-Croatian-language sources appear to be passing mentions too, at least from what I can glean from Google Scholar. There are 10 citations on the article: 6 from the HKV itself and 4 from websites which I cannot ascertain the reliability of. I cannot personally speak Serbo-Croatian, but even the Serbian and Croatian-language versions of this page mostly, if not exclusively, provide only citations back to the website itself. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 23:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Croatia. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 23:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:37, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Rajya Sabha members from the Aam Aadmi Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG, not notable enough, relatively new party which doesn't have a long established electoral history unlike the two established national parties, the BJP and INC, virtually no presence besides Delhi and Punjab. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 16:16, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:30, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, and Punjab. Shellwood (talk) 16:46, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The Aam Aadmi Party's history is not really relevant to the notability of this list, but as far as I understand it is a very significant political party, regularly making the news even outside of India. This list should be judged on WP:NLIST, which says "a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources". Importantly, "The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been". A brief web search turns up sources like [2], [3], [4], and [5], which discuss important parts of this topic (e.g. mentioning several of the people on the list as a group or telling us how many such people there are in total). I think this is clear evidence that NLIST is met. Toadspike [Talk] 11:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — CactusWriter ^(talk) 22:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Javadi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Procedural nomination per Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_April_27#Ali_Javadi * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:25, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Iran. Shellwood (talk) 16:45, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:49, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – A cursory search of his name in English and Farsi returned no in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Yue🌙 19:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Hamilton, Ontario municipal election (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:TOOSOON article about a future municipal election, not yet showing sufficient reliable source coverage to demonstrate that it would already need an article now.
As always, while we permit articles about future elections at the federal level to exist practically as soon as the public finish voting in the previous one, that's because there's actually substantive stuff to say about them: public polling on the popularity of the incumbent government, tracking changes in party leadership and seat standings, content about political issues, and on and so forth. But we don't generally maintain articles about city council elections this far in advance, because at the city council level all there is to actually say is idle speculation about who might or might not run, and that's all that's present here.
The article, further, is not adequately referenced to show that this is already the subject of any significant coverage as of May 2025 -- three of the six footnotes are primary sources that are not support for notability at all, and two more are from a hyperlocal community blog that doesn't count as a WP:GNG-worthy source at all (but were misrepresented in the citations as coming from a different publication than they really did, until I corrected them). Just one article comes from a real GNG-worthy newspaper at all, which is not enough all by itself.
It also warrants note that even Toronto doesn't have an article already in place about its 2026 municipal election yet, and Hamilton's hardly qualifies as more notable than Toronto's.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in the spring or summer of 2026, when there actually starts to be meaningful stuff to say and real candidates filing their nomination papers, but we don't need this to already have a Wikipedia article in 2025. Bearcat (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:18, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. These are fair points. A counter would be to note that the 2022 Hamilton, Ontario, municipal election page was created in September of 2020 - a full 25 months prior to the vote. Each election page is also used to include information on mid-term elections in the term prior to the vote and a by-election is very likely to occur in the coming months. The preliminary information on the page can be updated (it was originally copied from the 2022 page) as the City of Hamilton website already includes information on the 2026 vote. The Hamilton Spectator's coverage of the election has already begun and CBC Hamilton has similarly been publishing articles about possible changes to the city's voting system. As interest in the election begins to pick up, it seems more logical to keep a running record of candidate announcements, possible voting system changes, and issues rather than delete the page and start over again in May of 2026 when there may be a significant amount of information to include. All said, I am content to follow the will of the community on this. All the best. HamOntPoliFiend (talk) 22:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete. The only content here is pure speculation about who could be potential candidates. Once that is removed (as it should as their potential candidacy is based on speculation) there is not much left of the article. --hroest 20:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Only 17 Months Away, and the article will be needed even earlier. Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semantic broker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG. Not a single WP:RS found even for a redirect Clenpr (talk) 18:03, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:15, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Semantic Web. There's a good number of academic sources using the concept in relation to Semantic Web technologies. MarioGom (talk) 19:14, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect Agree with MarioGom, this is an easy redirect to Semantic Web.

  Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 22:45, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge wth Semantic mapper as preferred WP:ATD. ~Kvng (talk) 14:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This looks like a candidate to merge with Semantic Web too. Sub-concept, wholly unsourced. MarioGom (talk) 07:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have two different suggested target articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Misty Love (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Singer who fails WP:MUSICBIO. Most sources are artist's own website, with tangential mentions in album credits. One source is minor coverage in local media article. I don't see any in-depth coverage of subject in reliable secondary sources. Rift (talk) 18:54, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:21, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:MUSICBIO, WP:SIGCOV. Couldn't find anything of worth. scope_creep^Talk 14:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for a Soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:41, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Per WP:MUSIC or WP:ENT: no major awards, no songs in national charts, not certified gold, haven't won or placed in national competitions or any other notability requisite. No SIGCOV to meet WP:NBIO either. No major part in creating a major work. Couldn't find an independent source for the R&B Hall of Fame award, which is very minor by itself. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bahd Man Niko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. No significant coverage to show GNG either. CNMall41 (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. CNMall41 (talk) 20:14, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:MUSICBIO. I don't see any secondary sources to indicate notability. Rift (talk) 03:13, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

XB Machine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG Clenpr (talk) 21:25, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. Shellwood (talk) 22:01, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to xB Browser. It has been discussed mostly in connection to the xB Browser project [6][7][8]. MarioGom (talk) 22:40, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not much coverage about the machine itself. Redirect xB browser is an ok alternative too.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 03:12, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Not notable enough. It didn't have enough coverage in the 2000s and doesn't have enough now. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - an anonymous editor using an Orange España IP address removed refs before this AfD was initiated.^diff MarioGom subsequently restored them. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 05:32, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I am not sure any of them are reliable sources to demonstrate notability. Clenpr (talk) 19:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  AfD participants evaluate refs. It’s always inappropriate to delete any refs just before an AfD. Another editor thought the same thing and reverted those deletions. Editors are always sizing up their peers for trustworthiness and credibility. This type of thing doesn’t help. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  What is your assessment for those references? Are them reliable sources? Clenpr (talk) 13:41, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I already provided 3 sources above, which are way enough for a redirect. MarioGom (talk) 23:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Guild of Music & Speech (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Exam fails WP:GNG. Sources are nothing but primary sources. GTrang (talk) 21:42, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Organizations, Education, and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 21:59, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GTrang,

thanks for flagging this. Have briefly revised the page with some further secondary sources to demonstrate some notability. Very best, Saltysuperbananafruit (talk) 02:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: My source-quality scanner picks up "possibly AI-generated slop", flagging all references except 1, 4, 6. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 06:15, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is this relevant if ChatGPT is merely used assess the quality of secondary sources? The article has a clear chain in its edit history and is obviously not AI-produced. Saltysuperbananafruit (talk) 06:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Nothing in google news or books. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I note that until 2024, this organisation was named the Australian Guild of Music Education, so most sources will be under that name. I am currently looking for sources. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lambana (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Whilst not quite eligible for G14, I do not believe this disambiguation page is necessary. Out of the 4 items it disambiguates to, the first is to the wrong page (lambana redirects to Anito and Diwata, not to fairy as this article links). The second article is fine, but the third and fourth are both merely similar words where the term "lambana" does not appear in the article at all. CoconutOctopus talk 23:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. CoconutOctopus talk 23:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redirect to Anito and Diwata: The 3rd and 4th term do not belong here. Lambana is seldom used for the moth genus, and more used for the Philippine's folklore spirits. A simple for template in the moh article resolves errors. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Redirects from pages ending in (disambiguation) are reason for speedy deletion under G14 so this proposal would not work. The page lambana already is a redirect to Anito and Diwata. CoconutOctopus talk 22:00, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:36, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I changed my !vote above. Delete is better. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:44, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Birchmount Park-Warden Woods, Toronto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I don't think this neighbourhood exists; none of the sources cited mention it and I can't find anything else online. There is a Birchmount Park and a Warden Woods, but they are not a thing together. Nominating for AfD since there's a contested PROD, but fairly certain this is a neologism. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:44, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Canada. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:44, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - non-existant neighborhood. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 01:43, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - these appear to be adjacent areas covered in a single article. Perhaps a split is in order. ~Kvng (talk) 13:52, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  One appears to be a shopping mall and the other a park. I'm not sure if either is notable and the sources here appear to be all primary. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• split into two articles, both are notable geographical areas that have coverage but there is no precedence to have them together in one article. --hroest 20:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Splitting this article would mean creating two stubs with only primary sources. Why not just create both articles now if the sources exist? voorts (talk/contributions) 21:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:36, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Scarborough, Ontario. Seems more relevant there than a stand alone article. Not seeing why this residential area is notable. Seems like general information and sourcing is not significant. Ramos1990 (talk) 23:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1959 Dwight D. Eisenhower visit to Spain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The entire article was created in a single edit by User:Hectordej7544 ... and it is a fishy article. No in-line citations; only two sources. And both sources are very broad, generic sources (not specific to the 1959 visit). Another editor tagged the article as "AI-generated".

The WP:Verifiability is paramount, and articles need footnotes and citations to provide confidence. In addition, the editor that creates the articles should have READ the sources before creating the article.

I cannot verify if any of the information is valid, and I am challenging the content and the Notability. Noleander (talk) 22:32, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Spain, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:14, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - This visit was apparently a big deal in Eisenhower's presidency. I added a couple of external links that might help. The Remarks Upon Arrival at Torrejon Air Force Base, Madrid is provided via The American Presidency Project at UC Santa Barbara. — Maile (talk) 23:24, 17 May 2025 (UTC) — Maile (talk) 23:24, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:38, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/draftify Not adequately sourced to establish notability; his brief remarks are just a primary source. Presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower#Europe seems to be a better place for a few sentences here rather than a standalone article. Reywas92^Talk 04:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per Reywas92. No NEVENT. No evidence of WP:LASTING effect. FOARP (talk)|
• Redirect to Foreign policy of the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration#International trips. Fails WP:NEVENT. There are many other short state visits listed here and it isn't clear why this specific visit would be more noteworthy. MidnightMayhem 14:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aravaipa Running (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I was unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this "race-management company", with the best source being a press release. JTtheOG (talk) 22:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Sport of athletics, and Arizona. JTtheOG (talk) 22:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: No SIGCOV in independent, RS. The article has primary or not RS. UltraRunning Magazine is also owned by Jamil Coury / Steep Life Media. Most sources I found are about the Aravaipa Canyon in Arizona. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 16:05, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Birillo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The subject probably does not meet the WP:NBIO notability requirements. Sources are very weak. Subject of article (Ben Brillo) is only mentioned in passing in some of them. Is there not a single, independent source that describes him in great depth? Marginal sources with fleeting descriptions are not sufficient. Noleander (talk) 22:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:15, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Noleander, I agree that this editor should have posted more sources.. I added "Life Magazine" and a Joan Didion biograohy mention and will add more of the numerous other sources from books. Thank you for endeavoring or positing the conditiions as to where this article needs to go.Strattonsmith (talk) 14:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment (not an !vote) - Not ready for mainspace. In addition to the sourcing issues and format of the citations and the bare-url citations, it seems to have possibly been a bad machine translation job, per this sentence: As a painter thiugh hevwas a cintemopary of many if the major Pop artists hevsaw himself ss nit belinging to any particular school of art, The editor/creator would be kind to our team of new page patrollers if they proofread their work before moving to mainspace, please and thanks. Netherzone (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thaks I fixed not a translation just needed to be fixed.. Strattonsmith (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He curated the first acknowleged exhibition of Pop art ever, equals notableStrattonsmith (talk) 18:51, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Strattonsmith, I'm still seeing this: As a painter though he was a contemopary of many if the major Pop artists he saw himself as nit belonging to any particular school of art and the same bare URL citations. Maybe have another pass at it? Netherzone (talk) 22:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anshuman Magazine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Mentions, interviews, and unreliable sources (mainly WP:NEWSORGINDIA) is all I can find. Fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG. CNMall41 (talk) 22:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 22:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FIS Freestyle Ski and Snowboarding World Championships 2027 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Might just be WP:TOOSOON for an event two years out. More sourcing would have to be found to warrant a standalone article right now. JTtheOG (talk) 21:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Austria. JTtheOG (talk) 21:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's the next of this tournament, it is not a yearly a tournament, and the article will be needed eventually Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kiranraj K. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Repost of previously deleted and salted material: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiranraj K * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The subject has won awards though since the article was previously deleted. Mccapra (talk) 22:33, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lovedale (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NFILM: The film is widely distributed and has received full-length reviews by two or more nationally known critics. The film has no reviews at all and routine release information. The controversy section is not significant enough to generate its own article.

The outcome should be the same as this PROD: [9]. Redirect to List of Malayalam films of 2024#January–March. DareshMohan (talk) 21:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:17, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ángel Carrasco (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:SPORTSBASIC due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Note that the other AfD's are for an unrelated footballer. This article could possibly be redirected to Argentina at the 1948 Summer Olympics as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 21:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Argentina. Let'srun (talk) 21:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Argentina at the 1948 Summer Olympics#Sailing – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 02:26, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jorgito Jr Vargas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Spam article (and close to qualifying for WP:G11 speedy deletion) on a non-notable actor who fails WP:BIO. A search for sources turned absolutely no usable sources that would contribute towards notability. The only source cited in the article at present is completely irrelevant to the subject. JavaHurricane 21:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Canada. JavaHurricane 21:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, non-notable and unambiguously promotional. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Commment There was a slightly different version at Jorgito vargas jr (not created by the same author, but moved into the main space by them), which I've just A7/G11 speedied. I'm happy to nix this one as well, but won't yet just in case it is preferred to let the discussion run to its conclusion. (Needless to say, zero evidence of notability, in either version.) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:53, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DoubleGrazing, I'd prefer to let this AFD run its 7 days in case the article creators want to contest its deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:TNT. Another instance where the creator obviously has never closely read a Wikipedia article. Bearian (talk) 21:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Haraga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Subject does not appear to have the requisite significant coverage to meet the WP:SPORTSBASIC. Could possibly be redirected to Egypt at the 1948 Summer Olympics as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 21:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Egypt. Let'srun (talk) 21:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akash Murali (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NACTOR: The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films. Only one film not multiple, no other films in production like the cast of The Archies. Being able to write about his family doesn't give an excuse for an article, as that information is in his brother Atharvaa and father Murali (Tamil actor)'s pages. All of this information about his career is covered in Nesippaya. DareshMohan (talk) 21:15, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Tamil Nadu. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bundelkhand Institute of Engineering & Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There is nothing to salvage here. It uses only primary sources. Whatever sources are available online are mere trivial mention. So this cannot be merged as well. I would suggest a deletion or a redirect to List of colleges affiliated to the Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 21:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge as I proposed a few days ago. There's very little evidence of notability. Thank you Flyingphoenixchips, for the alert. Bearian (talk) 22:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Engineering, and Uttar Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

77x1957602 (talk) 21:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Krishna College of Engineering (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There is nothing to salvage here. It uses only primary sources. Whatever sources are available online are mere trivial mention. So this cannot be merged as well. I would suggest a deletion or a redirect to List of colleges affiliated to the Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 21:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/merge to LNCT University - seems the institution is actually LNCT (Bhopal) Indore Campus per [10], as the address matches there, and primary links on LKCE article are actually with LNCT. No apparent indication that this is (directly) connected to Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow Dl2000 (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Engineering, and Madhya Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ziad El Chaar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Complete vanity spam about a non notable business person, being pushed by an obvious paid editor. Just a run of the mill executive. BUNNYDICAE🐇 18:46, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:52, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:52, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:53, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The Blomberg article appears to be a non-primary source [11], rest are PR items or interviews. None of the sources in the article are RS. Oaktree b (talk) 20:51, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: As the creator of the page, I did a lot of research to make sure he met the qualifications. Here are some of the articles that show notability:

- Mubasher TV Major UAE publication and operates from more than 10 Middle East countries.

- Construction Business News, 2024

- Construction Business News, 2018

- ME Construction News

- Gulf News - Major UAE publication. Has a wiki page too.

- Construction Business News, 2023

- The National Major UAE publications, also has a wiki page.Originalflavors (talk) 03:49, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever read the requirements for sourcing? I'm asking out of curiosity, but I know the answer. BUNNYDICAE🐇 16:41, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course I have, but surely you are aware of WP:ANYBIO? The subject has 6 awards, including Entrepreneur.com’s Top 10 Inspiring Business Persons to Watch in the Middle East (2023) and Arabian Business’ 100 Most Inspiring Leaders (2024). These make him qualify under WP:ANYBIO. And then there is also WP:BASIC which states "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." Originalflavors (talk) 17:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I'm aware of it, but I'm pretty sure you don't understand the nuance of the "significant" portion of any part of what that GUIDELINE says. Good luck with the rest of your spam though. BUNNYDICAE🐇 19:40, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - based on assessment by @Originalflavors and also subject establishes notability based on WP:ANYBIO for having several known awards.Darkm777 (talk) 03:26, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Listicles are not enough to pass WP:ANYBIO. Gheus (talk) 02:05, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I understand that Listless by themselves are not considered significant sources. However, that doesn't change the fact that he has won 6 awards and per WP:ANYBIO he would qualify "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times." 2 of the awaads are well known, which are by Entrepreneur.com and Arabian Business, since both are recognizable brands and have Wiki pages.

  Note the Arabian Business has 7 paragraphs of content written on him, so it is hardly a listicle. In addition, there is a stand alone article on him in Arabian Business here. Also , here is one more Arabian Business coverage, with 6 paragraphs on him. Here he was ranked #38 on Dubai 100 most influential individuals.

  I have also found additional coverage on him, that is not currently used. Please check these:

  - Alarabiya Magazine

  - 4th Arabian Business article

  - Hotelier

  - Construction Week 1st Article and Construction Week 2nd article

  - Construction Business News

  - Gulf Business

  Clearly based on so much coverage, he is notable and this should be a SPEEDY KEEP. Originalflavors (talk) 05:17, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: AfD reopened and relisted per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2025 May 2.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Straightforward delete. WP:NOTCV. Fails WP:NBIO. Charlie (talk) 17:00, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ashish Kumar (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article doesn’t have even a single source. I checked on google for this actor and there is not even a single reliable source available. Absolutely non notable in my point of view. Afstromen (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Asia, and India. Afstromen (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Removed from Artists as no indication this individual is a visual artist. Jahaza (talk) 20:32, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Tashkent (1607) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find any sources in Latin or Cyrillic script about a battle of Tashkent in 1607. Mccapra (talk) 20:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Uzbekistan. Mccapra (talk) 20:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, and Kazakhstan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment possibly not a complete hoax? See[12] Jahaza (talk) 20:46, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• What about the sources that are already present in the article? Do they exist or are they hallucinated references? (Worldcat doesn't recognise the two ISBNs).Nigel Ish (talk) 20:54, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They may exist but I couldn’t find them. Mccapra (talk) 22:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the first book, Казахское ханство очерки внешнеполитической истории is available here[13] Jahaza (talk) 23:50, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that source says “In violation of the treaty with the Kazakh khans, they tried to return Tashkent, which had been in the hands of the Kazakhs since the end of the 16th century, under their rule. Already in the fall of 1603, according to the "Bahr al-Asrar" by Mahmud ibn Wali, Baki-Muhammed Khan attempted to capture the city, but was defeated by the troops of the Kazakh ruler of Tashkent Keldi-Mu-hammed Khan.” That’s all it says about the 1603 battle. About the 1607 battle it says “In 1607, a vassal of Vali-Muhammad Khan named Muhammadmed-Baki-biy Kalmak managed to capture Tashkent. However, he was not allowed to rule the city for a long time, he was driven out of the city by the troops of Yesim Khan.” That’s it. So we know there was fighting in Tashkent but there is nothing that indicates this was a notable battle. Mccapra (talk) 08:54, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mottram's Beach (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

unsourced article about unnotable beach; fails WP:GNG and can't find anything online harrz ^talk 20:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: no evidence of any usage of the term before this year. It looks like it has been invented by somebody creating a pin on Google Maps with this name a few months ago (the location of the pin is actually named Ringstead Bay). Joe D (t) 20:27, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect, Ringsted Bay is the bay area, Ringsted Beach ends at the outcrop of rocks (breakwater) east of the slipway. The beach between there and Burning Cliff is called Mottram's Beach, and has been for nearly 100 years, it was recently incorrectly labelled as Jenkins Beach, which was corrected this year, maybe that's why it looks to have been invented recently.

It's clearly marked on the National Trust maps in the area as 'Mottram's Beach'. 2A00:23C6:5E85:601:FC9E:97D7:3F57:B0C2 (talk) 20:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you can provide a reliable source for this, I will happily change my opinion from "delete" to "merge and redirect to Ringstead Bay" (there is unlikely to ever be an article's worth of information to say about the beach itself, it can be covered in the bay article – but only if the name can be verified). Joe D (t) 21:06, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an image of the map at the top on the National Trust carpark overlooking Ringsted Bay. The NT are the land owners of the AONB. (You might need to zoom in a bit to read the name).

https://imgur.com/a/guv3PLh 2A00:23C6:5E85:601:FC9E:97D7:3F57:B0C2 (talk) 21:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Tashkent (1603) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I am unable to find any sources in Latin or Cyrillic about a battle of Tashkent in 1603. It may have happened but it does not seem to have been notable. Mccapra (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Uzbekistan. Mccapra (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, and Kazakhstan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:23, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment this one has an English language source in the article, although the battle, an attempt to conquer Tashkent, reportedly occurred in Ikriyar. But this leaves me a little puzzled about the wording of the nomination. Jahaza (talk) 20:50, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it means that when I did a search, the English language source did not come up so I can’t verify that it is indeed a source for the material claimed. Mccapra (talk) 22:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What did you search? I was able to read it on Google Books[14], it's available from the publisher's web site, and WorldCat lists more than 300 libraries as holding it. Jahaza (talk) 23:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks unfortunately the relevant pages don’t show in my Google books view so I can’t verify it. Mccapra (talk) 03:43, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I believe this comes up on the odd occasion, where refs (and even their articles) are challenged because someone wasn't able to see/read the source to "verify" it, whether it's a web article behind a paywall, or a web page with some other form of restricted access, or physical books and other media, that "can't be found at local library or for sale online", etc., etc. I don't recall that itself being a reason to remove a ref, and delete an article, (I could be wrong). I don't believe it should be a reason either, whether it's having faith in the fellow editor that added it, or just the fact that there are numerous articles on WP, with even more refs that can't be easily and readily accessed, yet there hasn't been (to my knowledeg) any widespread efforts to initiate any massive deletion campaigns because of this. (jmho) Perhaps there's a guideline that covers this, but none have been cited here as of yet. - \\'cԼF 10:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

unfortunately in recent times some editors have taken to creating many articles about battles which are completely fictitious. These articles are decorated with pseudo-references to offline books in other languages. Other editors like to create battle articles based on a couple of passing mentions. If I look for sources and can’t find anything that supports what the article says then AfD is the place for it. Mccapra (talk) 12:20, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I apologize in advance if there are any mistakes in my words — I am writing through a translator. All the articles I have written are based on real books, but the problem is that some of them are not available in open access. So how do I have them? — I bought them. And as for the fact that they are hard to find online — the answer is simple: the history of Kazakhstan develops more slowly than that of other countries.

I write articles, and I know that the way I cited the sources is poorly done — I will try to fix that as soon as I have the time. Онеми (talk) 15:44, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Barbeau (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article subject requests deletion per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE and as a relatively unknown person per WP:BIODEL. See VRT Ticket 2025041610019291. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 22:55, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Music, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:15, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Weak Delete: The variety article mentioned on the page has a great significant coverage, but otherwise not much. Archive.org shows a couple of press release pdfs for his work. LastJabberwocky (talk) 05:58, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• This article is imcomplete, his career continues until 2025 but this is cut short at 2011. This seems innacurate and probably better to be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.81.140.33 (talk) 08:12, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep Beyond the cited references, I've found some additional coverage:
  1. A 2012 article from Le Journal de Montréal, "À la bonne place au bon moment," discusses Barbeau's transition from music videos to cinema, his produced films, and his views on public funding for films. This provides significant coverage, reinforcing notability.
  2. Another La Presse article from 2012, "Paul Barbeau: laisser une trace", is an interview focusing on his motivations for directing "Après la neige," his career risks, and personal reflections. This adds to the significant coverage.
     --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 17:12, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  APPLE LINK FOR À NOUS L'ÉTERNITÉ ( WE HAVE FOREVER)

  https://tv.apple.com/ca/movie/a-nous-leternite/umc.cmc.4w0rembphu3uypc1hz0ivhu86?l=fr-CA

  The present article does not even mention anything about this or We Had It Coming another film he directed.

  À nous l'éternité ( We Have Forever)

  Winner at the Talhassee Film Festival

  https://tallahasseefilmfestival.com/2019/04/10/2019-tff-award-winners-announced/ 70.81.140.33 (talk) 00:44, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Article is innacurate and deals with sources that date to 2012 when in fact producer has been recently active as a director and producer in past 5 years. Page badly constructed 70.81.140.33 (talk) 11:17, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I find it amusing all this discussion about articles not relevant when more than half of the articles were deleted.

How about this article: https://www.ledevoir.com/culture/cinema/586159/cinema-we-had-it-coming-la-chasse-au-monstre -- Le devoir is the most important newspaper in Quebec. That's in 2020... the wikipage as presently constructed stops in 2012... which is laughable..

How about this article?

https://variety.com/2019/film/news/media-luna-acquires-we-had-it-coming-the-friendly-man-cannes-1203195188/

How about that article. It's Variety. I'm sure you heard of it. Notable enough?

How about this film that Barbeau directed? À nous l'éternité ( We Have forever)

It's on APPLE.

Notable enough?

How about this one?

Producer on Woman of the Hour... in Variety again..

https://variety.com/2024/film/reviews/woman-of-the-hour-review-anna-kendrick-the-dating-game-1236181953/

How about this one?

Producer on Novocaine

https://variety.com/2025/film/reviews/novocaine-review-jack-quaid-1236331924/

All Variety articles...

I don't know what people in this discussion, wish to find out more but this page as I wrote previously should be DELETED. An administrator if you look at the history... Arbitrarily deleted 75% of it and stopped it at 2012... Without mentioning anything after 2012... so this page has been vandalized and damaged and all those articles were there previously. So I strongly suggest that you just delete this article page as it is dated and does not show anything of the past 12 years of the director / producer's career.

Thanks 70.81.140.33 (talk) 00:40, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Review of We Had It Coming

https://screenanarchy.com/2020/10/febiofest-prague-2020-review-we-had-it-coming-artful-thriller-battles-objectification-masculinity.html/1

https://filmthreat.com/reviews/we-had-it-coming/

None of these films are mentioned in the article. 70.81.140.33 (talk) 00:46, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Weak delete - as a producer, he's not automatically notable, and the reliability of some of the sources online are questionable; only the Variety is certainly reliable and maybe the La Presse articles. Bearian (talk)

• Keep In addition to the sources given above, and in the article, there is coverage of his films in Le Devoir (We Had It Coming , 2020 [15], Après la neige (2012) [16], and À nous l'éternité (2019) [17], [18] (same paper, but different journalists). L'Acadie Nouvelle also has an article about Le rouge au sol (2005) [19]. I am not clear why the subject has requested deletion (is there some reason why the grounds for request can't be stated in the AfD?), but the facts that the article is out of date and content has been added and deleted several times are not reasons for deletion. The article can be updated using reliable sources, which the Canadian newspapers (including The Gazette (Montreal) and La Presse already in the article) surely are. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:08, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you Rebecca. I'm not saying that the page should be deleted per say... I'm saying left as is, it is coompletely arbitrary to only mention his first film as director (and least notable) than the two others. Same thing for his producing career. Why stop in 2012? So if this page was vandalized and does not mention the entire career, I understand the reasoning behind wanting it deleted. It's incomplete, errenous and misleading. Unless all those articles go back in there. This IMDB link, shows clearly all that he is done and most of his work is nowhere to be seen here...

  https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0044867/?ref_=fn_all_nme_1 70.81.140.33 (talk) 21:09, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep': Per the above findings and arguments. LastJabberwocky (talk) 05:49, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  https://ctvm.info/bctq-le-quebec-a-cannes-le-film-splittsville-tourne-a-montreal-selectionne-au-festival-2025/

  So many producer credits are missing. If the producer credits can be added as well as directorial and the page is worthy of being Kept. If not, should be deleted as not Actual and accurate. 70.81.140.33 (talk) 10:29, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I tend to weigh heavily requests made under BLPREQUESTDELETE, and this producer is actually low-profile. I don't think anyone would argue he passes WP:GNG, but he arguably does pass WP:NBIO as a producer under WP:NCREATIVE. However, it's marginal enough that I think we should come down on the side of the request. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:10, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. He has Prix Iris and Canadian Screen Award nominations under his belt, and in fact even a win at the CSAs, and those are exactly the kind of top level film awards that nail notability to the wall for a film producer. Every person named in either Prix Iris for Best Film or Canadian Screen Award for Best Live Action Short Drama always needs to be either a blue link or a potential future blue link as soon as somebody gets around to it, and there can never be any exceptions who are "off limits" for us to write about, for any reason whatsoever.
  In actual fact, what really happened here is that there were repeated attempts to advertorialize it back in March, which sparked some revert-warring between administrators and anonymous IPs — so once again, this is clearly less a case of "I'm actually not notable", and more a case of "I want this article to not exist at all if I can't have editorial control of it", which is not how Wikipedia works.
  The article definitely does need some improvement and updating, but that needs to be done in a neutral writing tone rather than an advertorial one, and supported by reliable source media coverage rather than primary sources — so I've taken a stab at adding more neutrally written and properly sourced content. Bearcat (talk) 17:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The adjustments you made are fair. You are missing his latest film. SPLITSVILLE, premiering at the Cannes Film Festival. In fact, there is a hyperlink on the SPLITSVILLE page with his name appearing when you do a google search... He is also mentioned in this Deadline article. A pretty major publication.

  https://deadline.com/2024/08/splitsville-dakota-johnson-adria-arjona-to-star-michael-angelo-covino-film-1236047783/ 70.81.140.33 (talk) 03:37, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  A Best Director award also was won for À Nous l'éternité (We have Forever) which you now listed in his filmmography.

  https://tallahasseefilmfestival.com/2019/04/10/2019-tff-award-winners-announced/ 70.81.140.33 (talk) 03:59, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  https://variety.com/2019/film/reviews/the-lodge-review-1203127123/

  The lodge - co-producer 70.81.140.33 (talk) 15:36, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to awards, we're not interested in exhaustively listing every award a director ever won at just any film festival that exists — we're only concerned with film festivals whose awards get reported as news by the media (such as TIFF, Cannes, Berlin or Sundance). If you have to rely on a film festival's own self-published website about itself to source an award, because media reportage about that film festival's awards cannot be located, then that award is not notable enough for us to concern ourselves with it at all — a film festival's awards need to have third-party coverage, in media other than their own press releases, to become notable enough for us to mention in our articles. Bearcat (talk) 20:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. All that is missing then is The Lodge and Splitsville credits. 70.81.140.33 (talk) 12:41, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I am currently adding to the article the sources I found and noted above. RebeccaGreen (talk) 08:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I reopened and relisted this AfD as per consensus at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2025 April 28. Please refer to that discussion for additional arguments relevant to this AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would note that as the subject has engaged in signficant self promotion, including adding the image in the article [20] they are not eligible for WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE in the first place because they do not meet the relatively unknown/low profile requirement. Why this was not discussed before is unclear, but nobody ever seems to have asked whether this was a valid BLPREQUESTDELETE. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:45, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The BLPREQUESTDELETE also seems to have followed years of semi-successful but ultimately blocked[21] COI editing... [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] etc etc etc (lots of etc) Meaning that it may be doubly invalid as a bad faith request from a banned editor. It also means that that the IP that participated in this discussion is almost certainly evading a block. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:56, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep based on additional sources found and his own self-promotion. I've written about other requests for deletion after years of self-promotion. You can't undo it. Bearian (talk) 21:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Battle for Sanskrit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Unsure if this book meets notability requirements. Article needs to either be improved or deleted. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 20:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Philosophy, Hinduism, and India. Gommeh ➡️ Talk to me 20:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, or merge to Rajiv Malhotra. RM is an influential (and controversial) Hindutva-author; his publications have attracted a lot of attention. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep sigcov in a Brill book [40]. Appear to be some sigcov in academic journals. Cited by a solid amount of RS, and given this book's subject matter and ideology I would believe this is an indication of books that talk about it to some extent (not 'normal' citations). [41]

"Improved or deleted" is not how this works unless it's a copyright violation or literally incomprehensible. This article is just short. WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries by quality of healthcare (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There could be an article corresponding to this title, but I doubt it given that "quality of healthcare" is made of multiple factors and cannot be reasonably reduced to a single scalar value. In any case, this is not that article. The talk page shows lots of people unhappy with the existence of this article since several years. I tend to be on the inclusionist site, but this article is a net negative IMHO. cyclopia^speak! 19:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. cyclopia^speak! 19:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Lists. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• At the very least this needs to be moved to an NPOV title like "OECD healthcare quality ranking". 20:54, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete - Fails WP:SOURCE Not sure what purpose this serves. It seems to focus on select cancers and cardiovascular disease. But even at that, it's limited and the lone source is iffy. — Maile (talk) 02:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG and WP:MEDRS. Also, it can be improved Mast303 (talk) 02:54, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Unless there is evidence that the list is WP:OR, I don't see why it needs to be deleted. Lorstaking (talk) 03:20, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, currently it is not a list of quality of healthcare, it is a series of medical outcomes that can or cannot have to do with healthcare quality.--cyclopia^speak! 10:27, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prima facie, this is an arbitrary collection of rankings by health outcomes presented as a measure of healthcare quality. Both the selection of input variables and the inference that this is meaningfully a reflection of healthcare quality constitute WP:ANALYSIS, and as such need to come from the sources in order to not be WP:Original research. The onus to provide evidence is on those who assert that this is not original research, not on those who assert that it is. It is always impossible to prove that sources do not exist, whereas proving that they do is trivially accomplished by simply pointing to them if they do indeed exist. TompaDompa (talk) 13:46, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James C. Ford Memorial Bridge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

very short article which does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NGEO; only sources are a document on the bridge's renaming and a list of local bridges. harrz ^talk 19:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Tennessee. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:41, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mairead McIntyre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I'm not seeing enough coverage in my searches for a standalone article. Probably WP:TOOSOON as of now for this very young footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 19:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Ireland. JTtheOG (talk) 19:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 19:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since the creator (likely COI) has already moved the article out of draftspace prematurely once, I can't see any reason why they wouldn't do so a second time, even if backed by AfD. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 12:12, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 12:14, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @GiantSnowman JTW2023 (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes? GiantSnowman 12:46, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I have updated the page with more sources JTW2023 (talk) 12:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @GiantSnowman JTW2023 (talk) 12:50, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  None of which show significant coverage. GiantSnowman 12:51, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - best I can find is this image caption Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Footballers (of any class/level/whatever) are not automatically notable. WP:SIGCOV and WP:NSPORTS need to be met. And, in this case, are not. Don't see point in WP:DRAFTIFYing or other WP:ATDs. Given prior patterns. (Also, while not strictly relevant to AfD and in fear of appearing a little pearl-clutchy, I don't know which is "worse": creating a title on a non-notable child that the author has a connection to - or creating a title with uncited BLP on a minor they don't know). Anyway: my recommendation is deletion... Guliolopez (talk) 18:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UAVDACH (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A highly promotional article about a pressure group that seems to fail WP:NORG. Having nuked some of the spam in the article, I tried to look for sources, and found none (the group seems to be known as "UAV DACH", and even searching for that got me nothing usable as a source, let alone something that would contribute towards NORG). That said, it is possible that I may be unable to access or find local sources in a search because of my location, and I think bringing it to AfD would also bring this article to the wider community's attention and increase the possibility of sources being found, if they exist. JavaHurricane 18:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Aviation, and Germany. JavaHurricane 18:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic Emirate of Rafah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The community has expressed opposition to the misleading use of the country infobox at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 191#RfC: micronation infoboxes. This spirit of this argument against misleading presentation extends to the wider article in this case. The core of this article is an unattributed WP:CFORK of Jund Ansar Allah. Much of the content is taken from there, and its conversion to imitate a country article is misleading to readers as per the RfC. The article presents a one day standoff in a mosque as a country. Development of the shifted material has furthered this. For example, that the entity "Collapsed" is stated in the lead and reinforced by the body, but there was never an entity that existed to collapse. Categories such as Category:Former countries in Asia are entirely inappropriate. The sources in the article, which mostly come from the Jund Ansar Allah article, are about Jund Ansar Allah and the Battle of Rafah (2009). They do not support the claim there was actually an independent state for one day. CMD (talk) 18:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Palestine. CMD (talk) 18:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:33, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment
Hi CMD. I've edited this article before, and IIRC, there were sources or other information on this article that I read that verified that JAA did declare a separate emirate, but obviously they're not on the page anymore if they were. I need to do some more research to come to a definitive conclusion, but I think given that the Battle of Rafah and the Emirate cannot really be contextually divorced from one another, it makes sense to merge and redirect this article into the battle of Rafah article. This is just speculating, but I think all three could possibly be merged into the JAA article. I need to do more research overall though. Castroonthemoon (talk) 19:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are clear the JAA "declared" a separate emirate; that's a different claim than supposing that this declaration actually created an emirate. I have done a bit of looking into whether the Battle of Rafah (2009) could be merged, and it probably could, but it does not have the same contextual issues as this article. CMD (talk) 03:40, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmunkdavis: would your argument also apply to the Democratic Republic of Yemen article, which is about only a declared entity that wasn't really established? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:27, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible similar arguments might figure out into exactly how to present the information, but it seems to be very dissimilar situation to the article at hand. CMD (talk) 08:37, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into battle of Rafah 2009 JaxsonR (talk) 20:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i mean JAA JaxsonR (talk) 04:56, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into Jund Ansar Allah, as this is a blip in JAA's history that warrants coverage on the militant organization's page, no more. Longhornsg (talk) 00:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You think the Battle of Rafah (2009) article could be merged as well? Castroonthemoon (talk) 20:11, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  no JaxsonR (talk) 20:52, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2016 in Indian television (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

PROD denied, converting to AFD. Rationale from PROD: fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. UtherSRG (talk) 17:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Given what the other "Year in <nation> televisions" articles look like (using the bottom navigation template), this seems to be appropriate to keep but would just likely need to populated with sourcing from Indian sources. I did a few spot checks and it looks like those entries can be sourced. I see no reason to delete it, since AFD is not cleanup. Masem (t) 17:14, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:42, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Utsunomiya University Yoto Campus Station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is a railway station that appears to lack independent coverage. As best I can tell (not Japanese), most of the listed sources are either from the city of Utsunomiya itself or passing mentions that are actually covering Utsunomiya Light Rail as a whole. Per WP:NTRAINSTATION, this station doesn't appear to be notable on its own. This page should either be deleted or redirected to the rail system page linked above. Garsh (talk) 16:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect Along with several other stations for the reasons above. Please speedy close this AfD unless there is somehow a consensus to delete it instead of redirecting it back to the line article.

AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 23:06, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Data structure (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This disambiguation page lists the primary topic and one other topic. The correct thing to do here is delete the disambiguation page and find a suitable hatnote for the top of Data structure. PROD removed by @N2e: Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The DAB page lists the primary topic Data structure, one secondary topic, Data structure (blockchain), followed by one see also link, List of data structures (a navigation aid for the primary topic). WP:ONEOTHER states that If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed—it is sufficient to use a hatnote ... If an existing disambiguation page does not appear to be needed because there are only two topics for the ambiguous title and one of them is the primary topic ... it may be deleted if, after a period of time no additional ambiguous topics are found to expand the disambiguation page. The DAB page was created in December 2020 and tagged with {{One other topic}} in November 2023. If we cannot find more than one secondary topic here, the page should be deleted.

Furthermore, I would view Data structure (blockchain) to be a spurious secondary topic. The link is a redirect to Blockchain#Openness, created following the 23:24, 4 December 2020 bolding of data structure in the sentence Proponents of permissioned or private chains argue that the term "blockchain" may be applied to any data structure that batches data into time-stamped blocks. This refers to data structure in its primary-topic sense. So while it's not the subject of this AfD, I don't think Data structure (blockchain) is an appropriate name for this redirect; it should either be renamed to Blockchain (data structure) or deleted. Preimage (talk) 18:17, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:ONEOTHER but also the one other shouldn't even exist, as it is superfluous Ivey (talk - contribs) 18:40, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sammakorn MRT station (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Per WP:NTRAINSTATION, train stations have no inherent notability. The sources in this article, and others online, only mention this station in passing as an addition to Bankok's Orange Line. This page should either be deleted or redirected to the orange line page. Garsh (talk) 16:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and Thailand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Orange Line (Bangkok)#Stations Bit WP:TOOSOON given the station only opens in 2030. Jumpytoo Talk 17:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Either Keep all Orange Line stations articles or Redirect all.

🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 06:26, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Agree with Jothefiredragon in that there doesn't seem to be any point in singling out just this article; a mass nomination would be more appropriate. That said, at worst these should be redirected rather than deleted, so unless the action proves controversial AfD doesn't seem necessary. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:03, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fnaire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Questionable amount of notability and sigcov to deserve its own article. YouTube and Genius "sources" do not count. MimirIsSmart (talk) 15:54, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Morocco. MimirIsSmart (talk) 15:54, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Warriors 4 Christ Wrestling (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No notable pro wrestling promotion. quick search shows 0 results. Since it was deleted in 2008, i recomend WP:SALT HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wrestling and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment — Alternative weeklies are typically regarded as credible journalistic sources. Are we disregarding that source because of a dead URL? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 18:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • One source. Per WP:GNG, "multiple sources are generally expected" looking here, there are mostly wikias, reddit and facebook/youtube. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Air Panamá Flight 982 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Sources provided do not establish notability per WP:NEVENT. Perhaps because all persons on aircraft survived (after it drove off the runway). Aircraft driving off runways (after landing) are sort of common, and if there are no deaths, not sure this will ever get much coverage from independent sources. Granted, the crash was recent, and perhaps more coverage will arise in the coming weeks or months. See also essay WP:Too soon. Noleander (talk) 15:33, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i think i fixed it Grffffff (talk) 15:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Grffffff - If you think the article meets the WP:Notability requirements, you should write a paragraph here explaining how it was a signficant event, and describe some sources that discuss the event in some detail.

The line between notable and not notable is not black and white. It can take awhile to get the gist of it; in general: it requires a few sources to talk about the subject IN DEPTH, not merely reporting on it as a minor, passing news event. Also, ask: will people still be taking about the event a few years in the future?

Also: there was a similar deletion proposal here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frontier Airlines Flight 3506 ... I cannot see that article now, but did you create that also? If so, it may be wise to become more familiar with the following policies: WP:GNG, WP:NEVENT, WP:NOTNEWS and the essay WP:COOKIE. Noleander (talk) 18:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This should be on Wikipedia for the following reasons: it included in the aircraft getting written off. Grffffff (talk) 18:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it’s also somewhat notable Grffffff (talk) 18:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Noleander Grffffff (talk) 18:09, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m gonna see if I can use Google translate to share some information these news stories reported. Grffffff (talk) 18:10, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Google translated from one of the sources: “A video circulated on social networks of the moment when the aircraft arrived at the airport for landing before the accident, where it was also possible to verify the adverse weather conditions, with heavy rain.” keep in mind heavy rain. Grffffff (talk) 18:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article should not be deleted as it notes an incident that doesn’t occur daily. It involved the loss of the aircraft as well. Grffffff (talk) 18:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to Air Busan aircraft that burned down. Grffffff (talk) 18:17, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also @Noleanderjust saw it said 12 were injured. https://www.tvn-2.com/nacionales/avion-sale-pista-isla-colon_1_2189930.amp.html Grffffff (talk) 18:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and Panama. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I think it has the potential to stay but the quality is very bad. If the article is improved, I would say keep. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 19:10, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree on this. This incident is notable enough to warrant an article but would have to be almost completely rewritten due to poor quality. IDKUggaBanga (talk) 21:32, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help Grffffff (talk) 15:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. not major accident. 122.147.252.162 (talk) 02:25, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That makes zero sense. Can you explain how? cause I feel like that shouldn't be counted as a vote. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 05:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Like you no shit. The aircraft was destroyed and people were injured. I think the Tenerife Airport disaster was not a major accident Grffffff (talk) 15:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DeleteShows no notability, small airline, small accident, 12 injuries on a flight does not automatically determine notability, same thing with fatalities on a flight, just because someone was injured or died does not mean that that it is automatically notable. WP:NOTNEWS

(extra note: apologies for any formatting issues as this is my first time using mobile to edit) Lolzer3000 (talk)

Baloch National Movement (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG, mostly primary/affiliated sources, no significant coverage in WP:RS. Doesn't meet notability per WP:ORG or WP:NPOV. - PunjabiEditor69 (talk) 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Organizations, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

South Martin, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Something of an odd case, as usually a post office that old is attached to a town. But I could find no documentation of one here, so "just a post office' seems to be the verdict. Mangoe (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - agree, only a post office was here. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 23:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Insignificant location. Shankargb (talk) 15:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paradigm classification (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The concept of paradigm classification is not clear and not widely used in the sense of a two-dimensional classification structure. This article really has only one reference, and that is a blog by William Denton called Miskatonic University Press. According to that text, paradigm classification is not a subset of faceted classification. That is not accurate, according to Denton´s blog. The term can also be used in the sense of classification of paradigms, which is how it used in the Ahlberg paper. So, paradigm classification is not widely used and it is used in different senses. In any case, the concept does not warrant a Wikipedia article. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 14:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 14:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's What Girls Do (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Disputed draftification. WP:DRAFTOBJECT applies. Fails WP:NMUSIC. Single reference. Fails WP:V. Suggest following the consensus inthe first AfD to Redirect to No Secrets (No Secrets album), protecting the redirect. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 14:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to No Secrets (No Secrets album) per nom. The one reference in use only mentions the chart position for the album and not this specific song. Jalen Barks (Woof) 15:27, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per nom. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 19:36, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @MarioSoulTruthFan If you are going strictly by "per nom" I have not suggested deletion. I am not seeking to influence you, though. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 20:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry, I meant redirect. I will correct it. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 06:25, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mumbai Regional Congress Committee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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