Wikipedia:XfD today

Deletion discussions
Deletion today Undeletion Deletion review Deletion log Request a copy of a deleted article
Articles
today all (sorted) closing log
Templates and modules
today all closing holding
Files
today all closing
Categories
today all closing speedy
Redirects
today all closing log
Miscellany
today all closing
Speedy deletion
candidates
Proposed deletion
all (sorted) BLPs
Policy Process Guide Administrator guidelines
v t e

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

Recent AfDs:    Today    Yesterday      April 21 (Sun)      April 20 (Sat)      April 19 (Fri)     More... Media   Organisations   Biography   Society   Web   Games   Science   Arts   Places   Indiscern.  Not-Sorted

Purge server cache

Exercise Anorak Express

Exercise Anorak Express (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. No coverage in secondary sources. Entire article is copy/pasted from [1]. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Transportation. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anshul Avijit

Anshul Avijit (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)

Candidate in the current Indian elections. Fails WP:NPOL, coverage appears otherwise routine. He can't inherit notability from his grandparents or mother. AusLondonder (talk) 20:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. AusLondonder (talk) 20:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marcelle Slabbert

Marcelle Slabbert (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 sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject, a South African rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 20:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 20:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Corinthian Project

The Corinthian Project (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:NBOOK Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Literature. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to New Series Adventures#Decide Your Destiny - Appears to be a completely non-notable licensed book that has no coverage in reliable sources. The one review being used as a source is someone's personal blog, and thus not a reliable source. Searches did not turn up any kind of coverage or reviews, outside of simple product listings. It is already listed in the appropriate section of the list of books its belongs to, and as there is no content to merge, it should be redirected there. Rorshacma (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnam at the 2026 Asian Games

Vietnam at the 2026 Asian Games (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:TOOSOON. It's still too early for this article (and other similar ones) to exist. CycloneYoris ^talk! 19:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Vietnam. CycloneYoris ^talk! 19:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ernesto Wong

Ernesto Wong (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. Non-notable baseball career with no statistics, and no coverage outside playing city (Turin). 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 19:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charter Vocational High School

Charter Vocational High School (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)

Moritoriko (talk · contribs) attempted to nominate this article for deletion, but accidentially nominated the talk page instead. Their original rationale follows:

This school seems to fail WP:NORG and really all of WP:N as well. Oddly enough in my research to check if reached notability I found https://web.archive.org/web/20090315093609/http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/217375/state_warns_2_albuquerque_charter_schools__boards_could_face/index.html which *might* be enough for Danny Moon to get his own page but I still feel like the school is ancillary in all this.

My involvement in this nomination is entirely procedural; I have no opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and New Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glen Horton

Glen Horton (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)

Non-notable rugby player, fails WP:SPORTCRIT. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rugby league, Rugby union, and New Zealand. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Night Hawk (comics)

Night Hawk (comics) (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 initially WP:PRODed this article with the following rationale: "Non-notable fictional character. None of the current references are reliable, secondary sources. Searches just turned up very trivial mentions - no significant coverage in reliable sources." It was later de-prodded, with the suggestion that a full discussion should be held due to the subject being a pre-internet subject, so I am bringing it to AFD. To give further details on my WP:BEFORE results, the only results I was able to find in actual reliable sources were extremely brief, usually just a sentence or two stating "An early example of this kind of character was Night Hawk" and that's about it, such as these two books. Rorshacma (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Comics and animation, and United Kingdom. Rorshacma (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Parsons (producer)

Jack Parsons (producer) (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 only has a single source, not enough for notability. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 19:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ebrahim Etemadi

Ebrahim Etemadi (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)

Ebrahim Etemadi likely doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Additionally, the mentioned sources might not be reliable enough. Waqar💬 19:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, and Music. Waqar💬 19:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Iran. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William James Crawford

William James Crawford (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)

Unref article, and I couldn't find sources to show he meets WP:BIO / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 19:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Photography, Football, Rugby union, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elias Huizar

Elias Huizar (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 defamatory article based on WP:OR with a non-free image improperly labeled as such and a subject that fails WP:GNG. Lettlre (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, Police, Education, and Washington. Lettlre (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete - WP:NOTNEWS. Suspected murderer on the run, not yet captured by authorities. Also, the image of the suspect is not licensed for our use. — Maile (talk) 19:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete G10/A7.Mccapra (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jenma Films International

Jenma Films International (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)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. The source cited as being the source for the entire text portion of the article is an obituary which makes only a brief mention of the company. And so the text of the article is about the person who died, not the company. The other refs are about films, not the company. North8000 (talk) 19:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Companies, and Maharashtra. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2020–21 Deportivo de La Coruña season

2020–21 Deportivo de La Coruña season (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 playing in professional division, does not appear to meet WP:SIGCOV under WP:GNG. Already deleted for same reasons in 2020. Crowsus (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Spain. Crowsus (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – Even though they are in a lower division in the season in question, Deportivo La Coruña's notability is undoubted. Svartner (talk) 18:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:29, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per last AFD. GiantSnowman 20:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree with Svartner. Continuity in the coverage of a historically professional team is important in an encyclopedia. Anwegmann (talk) 21:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Even know they are a notable club doesn't mean their seasons qualify under the SNG WP:NSEASONS, they are too far down the ladder now. So delete per notability on the season. Govvy (talk) 21:53, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 16:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This season is very notable because of the nature of it and the circumstances regarding the club at this time, as it entered a new era. - Cr7s 190.153.84.93 (talk) 02:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AccuSystems

AccuSystems (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 article doesn't show any reason for notability and reads as an advertisement. Nigel757 (talk) 17:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Software, and Colorado. Skynxnex (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Borderline A7, does not really make any recognisable CCS. Also WP:BROCHURE as of current version, but the pre-UPE edited versions available in the article history are better in that regard. I cannot find anything beyond name checks, not even passing mentions really. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 18:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JSmooth

JSmooth (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)

Software. No assertion of notability, no third party references, tagged since 2019. Sandstein 16:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 16:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 18:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No sign of notability. I could not find any proper coverage. Unreferenced duffs like these should either be improved or be nuked out of the orbit. I highly doubt anyone can come up with a minimum of 3 sources that'd help establish its cause of notability. [This AFD has been relisted once, and so far no other participation. It'd be a shame if this goes without a consensus.] X (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trés Hanley

Trés Hanley (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)

Strong WP:COI vibes; the article creator has (mostly) only edited this article over a period of 14 years, also uploaded the two pictures as "own work" that are in the article. Sources are the subject's personal website and two sources that don't meet WP:RS. Lots of unsourced cruft. A search for more RS reveals lots of user-generated content, which fits the pattern. Fred Zepelin (talk) 18:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Television, Theatre, England, and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bruno Marques (architect)

Bruno Marques (architect) (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 independent sources given that show notability. Of the links provided one is to his staff biography and the other doesn't mention him at all. All I found were items that show he exists but don't show notability. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 18:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I just noticed the name of the articles author, Brunomarkes. A variant of the subjects name. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 18:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Architecture, Germany, Portugal, and New Zealand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Riaan Engelbrecht

Riaan Engelbrecht (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 sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject, a South African rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. Not to be confused with the author of the same name. JTtheOG (talk) 19:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 19:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Amature player with minimal coverage. Mn1548 (talk) 16:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 18:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Parenti

Mike Parenti (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 sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject, a French rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. The best I could find was this from Treize Mondial, which is only a couple of sentences. JTtheOG (talk) 19:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and France. JTtheOG (talk) 19:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - pro footballer who played in the Super League, sourced.Fleets (talk) 07:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Undecided: Playes for Catalans and there should be more written about him. Should be expanded, but currently not sufficient coverage. Mn1548 (talk) 16:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No significant coverage. Fails WP:SPORTBASIC. J Mo 101 (talk) 11:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 18:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Life expectancy (concept)

Life expectancy (concept) (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 about to nominate this for A10 as a duplicate of Life expectancy. However this does seem to expand upon the concept so what should be done here? Cleo Cooper (talk) 17:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• (Speedy) Delete A10 would seem entirely sensible here, the two are about the same concept, and this is a far shorter and less substantial text. If you think there's anything worth merging, go right ahead, but we should not have a CFORK. Delete without a redirect. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly as a merge to Life expectancy Industrial Insect (talk) 18:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Mathematics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:33, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carl von Arensdorff

Carl von Arensdorff (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 decdlined w suggestion to AfD instead: This article has been WP:UNSOURCED for 15 years and fails WP:GNG in every search I could do. Maybe there is a case to merge with Friedrich von Arenstorff, but he seems poorly sourced as well. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sweden. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Denmark, Germany, and Netherlands. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: There is some coverage in this book and he may have an entry or partial entry in the 1929 edition of the Svensk uppslagsbok, but I could not find a digitized version of the latter so I'm not sure. A redirect to his notable brother Friedrich von Arensdorff is a suitable WP:ATD. Curbon7 (talk) 20:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 20:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep a source has been added and inclusion in the Danish DNB indicates notability. Mccapra (talk) 21:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buffer theory

Buffer theory (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 article does not really focus on "Buffer theory" and only mentions it once. It would probably be best if this were merged or redirected to another article. Shadow311 (talk) 15:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shadow311 (talk) 15:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Current state of the article and its content are irrelevant. I could find plenty of sources discussing the buffer theory here and here. It is important to note that since there is another buffer theory in the fields of biology and chemistry, I had to include the keyword "migration" which weeds out most of the irrelevant sources. More could be found with different search terms. I can't also think of an article for this to redirect/merge into. The most relevant option would be a topic such as human migration or international migration, which are very general, so a main article on this topic is warranted in my current opinion. Aintabli (talk) 01:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 16:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Swedistan

Swedistan (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 little more than an Internet meme that began its existence as a 4chan hoax. Most of the references in the article don't even use the term "Swedistan". As the term is not commonly used, it has not been the object of significant coverage. Pichpich (talk) 16:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam, Internet, and Sweden. Skynxnex (talk) 16:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peach Boxing

Peach Boxing (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)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. A boxing gym business. Zero references on the gym/business. All of them are about events related to boxers. North8000 (talk) 15:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. Choucas Bleu (T·C) 15:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Boxing, and New Zealand. Skynxnex (talk) 16:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shibata Takumi (fund manager)

Shibata Takumi (fund manager) (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)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. Basic business person resume/CV. Of the 4 references, 3 are brief appointment announcements and one is a brief database type description. North8000 (talk) 15:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, and Japan. Skynxnex (talk) 16:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

146th Air Support Operations Squadron

146th Air Support Operations Squadron (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)

It exists but there is limited coverage (article currently unreferenced, with some possible sources which could be added). I couldn't see that it meets WP:ORG / WP:GNG in its own right, or a suitable merge target. Boleyn (talk) 14:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wz. 89 Puma

Wz. 89 Puma (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)

Unclear why this shortlived Polish camouflage pattern would be notable, sources are primary or passing it seems. Fram (talk) 14:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Fashion, and Poland. Fram (talk) 14:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Connely

Michael Connely (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:BLP of a politician not properly sourced as passing WP:NPOL. As always, unelected candidates for political office do not get articles on that basis per se -- the notability test at NPOL is holding a notable office, not just running for one, while candidates qualify for articles only if either (a) they already had some other basis for notability that would already have gotten them an article anyway, or (b) they can show credible grounds for why their candidacy should be seen as a special case of significantly greater and more enduring notability than most other people's candidacies.
But this is written more like a campaign brochure than an encyclopedia article, and is referenced to two primary sources that aren't support for notability at all and two hits of purely run of the mill campaign coverage, which is not enough to establish that he would satisfy either of the conditions for the permanent notability of an unelected candidate.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the seat, but nothing here is already grounds for an article now. Note as well that this title previously existed as a redirect to the first election that he already ran in and lost, until being turned into a standalone article within the past two days on the basis of his new candidacy — so restoring the original redirect, or repointing it to the current election, would also be options. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Nebraska. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per nom; very fluffy piece with little to no evidence of notability currently. No objection to draftifying if consensus is that it is just a case of WP:TOOSOON. But it would need to be edited and sourced before publishing. LizardJr8 (talk) 16:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - this is nothing more than a 2021 electioneering bio for "an unknown political newcomer" He didn't win, so this article has no real purpose on Wikipedia. — Maile (talk) 18:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Military. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Schwein

Schwein (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)

Relisting as previous nomination did not attract any comment and soft deletion was not applicable. Non-notable band that only lasted one year; no sources found in English or German. Sources in Japanese linked on the page do not show WP:SIGCOV. Broc (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Japan, Germany, and United Kingdom. Broc (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth, Indiana

Kenneth, 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)

The cited history consistently refers to the place as a "flag stop", and nothing on the topos or aerials serves to rebut this; indeed, the topos indicate this was likely the name of the junction of the two rail lines. I'm not sure why the history and Forte's PO site disagree about the date the post office closed, but it's clear that thee was never a settlement here. Mangoe (talk) 14:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Transportation, and Indiana. Skynxnex (talk) 16:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: A post office is a central part of a community. Just from cursory googling, it seems like the town at the very least DID exist, but eventually was consumed by Logansport. Currently, there is a quarry named the Old Kenneth Stone Quarry about a mile from the GPS coordinates given in the article, as well as a small town or neighborhood clearly visible from aerial photography. The town certainly exists, though perhaps we should try to dig up more sources for it. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 17:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helen O'Donnell

Helen O'Donnell (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 wary when I see candidates who did not have articles get them in the run-up to an election. Per WP:POLITICIAN, being a candidate doesn’t grant notability. That said, not all the referenced coverage here pertains to her candidacy. She was Limerick person of the year and a local businesswoman. Would such mentions have granted her notability, independent of her candidacy? Iveagh Gardens (talk) 13:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Ireland. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 13:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She was red linked through Forum for Peace and Reconciliation long before candidacy for DEM, this being the major jumping off point for a page. That with work with the Safefood advisory board, founded as part of the Good Friday Agreement, seemed like valid notability. ChocoElephant (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 16:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw: As another editor has noted, the article had the air of a party political broadcast. While it might still need work, I’m reasonably satisfied this isn’t as obvious a candidate for deletion as I thought earlier today. My earlier searches provided only references to her current candidacy, but there is more there than that. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Polish military aircraft

List of Polish military aircraft (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 list is unnecessary duplicate of Polish Air Force#Aircraft and Polish Land Forces#Aircraft. I don't see any good reason to such duplication, also the creator of that article was recently inform that there is consensus to not put aircraft image into the inventory table, it seems he is trying to circumvent the consensus by creating new article/list

This additional list of aircraft seems redundant since it's already covered in the Polish Air Force#Aircraft and Polish Land Forces#Aircraft articles. There doesn't appear to be a valid reason for this duplication. Moreover, the person who created the list was recently informed about the consensus to not put aircraft image into the inventory table, so it seems like they're trying to work around that consensus by creating a new article or list. Ckfasdf (talk) 13:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this should be deleted, then be consistent and recommend the deletion of:

• List of active United States military aircraft
• List of active Russian military aircraft
• List of active military aircraft of the French Armed Forces

Because individual lists exist for each branch, and then another summary exists. The problem of the list in the other pages is that it lacks details, and people don't want additional details there. At least here, there is more clarity.

If the images are a problem, then it should be a problem with

• List of active United States military aircraft
• List of active People's Liberation Army aircraft

Fabrice Ram (talk) 14:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Transportation, Lists, and Poland. Skynxnex (talk) 16:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mask Bloc

Mask Bloc (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 believe these groups meet the notability criteria for organisations, there is limited in-depth coverage of the phenomena. This is too soon for this to be an article, and borderline promotional of the advocacy group. JeffUK 06:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and COVID-19. JeffUK 06:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a group its more like an organizing tactic similar to Black Blocs and I don't see how its too soon as the covid pandemic is an ongoing situation and had an article as soon as it was named. The article is important information for an ongoing pandemic I don't see why it would be deleted. Wikibobdobbs (talk) 06:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree with the suggestion of removing this article, and I'm confused as to how it can be justified, given that the movement is very much an active (and growing) one. I'm currently beginning research on this specific form of mutual aid as part of my postgraduate dissertation, and while the article needs to be cleaned up for consistent formatting, etc., there is no reason (other than a "political" objection to masking) to remove this at present, even if the information is under-reported. This is "grey literature," essentially. MAINShorebird (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Claudia Rivero (journalist)

Claudia Rivero (journalist) (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)

Non-notable per WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Appears to be an autobiography, and in a WP:BEFORE search the only secondary coverage I can find is what's cited here. The rest is primary sources and passing mentions. The only mention I can find of awards is on primary sources like her website, with no mention of her on the Emmys or AP websites. Wikishovel (talk) 05:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, Arizona and Pennsylvania. Wikishovel (talk) 05:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes criteria 1 of WP:ANYBIO and criteria 4 of WP:JOURNALIST as the winner of a Rocky Mountain Emmy Award in 2007. The website archives are incomplete, going back only to 2011. She is widely cited though in RS as an Emmy winner in passing (for example https://www.local10.com/news/2014/01/10/teacher-charged-with-having-sex-with-student/ ) The off-hand mentions of awards from the associated press also occur. It would be career suicide to lie about that kind of thing for a journalist. So all and all, not seeing a good argument here for not passing the criteria for those WP:SNGs.4meter4 (talk) 20:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4: that article actually quotes an unrelated student named Claudia Rivero, and the Emmy winner is some other reporter. And I still can't find a secondary source about the reporter Claudia Rivero winning an Emmy. Wikishovel (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If we are able to locate a list of winners of the 2007 Rocky Mountain Emmy Awards (which should be feasible in off-line refs for sure) it should verify the win. She is on the nominees list https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/5970167/2007-rocky-mountain-emmyr-nominees but unfortunately this does not list the winners.4meter4 (talk) 21:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Draft - if there is confusion about different people with the same/similar names then I'm thinking the sensible move is to draft until there is clarity who is who. JMWt (talk) 07:43, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Non-notable journalist; we only consider Regional Emmys notable with much more sourcing than what's here. This is simply a list of where the person has worked, nothing showing why they're notable. I can only find PR or primary sources. Oaktree b (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raw Deal (card game)

Raw Deal (card game) (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)

An article on a defunct collectable card game that has been tagged as needing secondary sources since 2008. Of the four sources cited, only two are independent, and neither appears to include anything approaching the level of significant coverage necessary to meet Wikipedia notability criteria. Almost all the content is entirely unsourced, and consists of a how-to guide for playing the game, rather than anything approaching secondary-sourced encyclopaedic commentary. A Google search finds nothing that might rectify the problems. In short, non-notable fancruft. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: PROMO for a defunct card game, with primary sourcing used. There might be coverage in the Dummies book, but we'd need more than that. I don't find anything, and it's been almost 20 yrs now, likely nothing else will be found. Oaktree b (talk) 15:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boc Maxima

Boc Maxima (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 GNG. Did a WP:BEFORE search and everything I found mentions the album in passing. 🌙Eclipse ^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Scotland. Skynxnex (talk) 16:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barby Storage Reservoir

Barby Storage Reservoir (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 refs on the page for many years, not seeing much which could be considered against the notability criteria for inclusion. It certainly exists, the trouble is finding substantial reliable sources about it. As an ATD we could merge to the reservoir section on Severn Trent JMWt (talk) 07:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and England. JMWt (talk) 07:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Now sourced. However, if there is merge, it should be to Draycote Water. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any comments on the improvements to the article since its nomination?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vecteezy

Vecteezy (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 surprised that User:Jamiebuba approved this page because this company has a long and torrid history of COI and uploading promotional pages to Wikipedia and this page seems no different to what has gone before. Sure, we've got Entrepreneur Magazine which might have been published independently of the subject but there are a lot of sources that don't count as RS like press releases, local newspapers and the dreaded TechCrunch the least independent source in the history of business journalism. I think it's safe to say that this one-man band, run of the mill, stock image supplier fails WP:NCORP and is hardly notable so fails WP:GNG. I am interested to see what crawls out of the woodwork in the ensuing discussion, though.Dafydd y Corach (talk) 08:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Photography, Companies, Websites, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The Biz journal article is repeated in a Lexington newspaper and by Yahoo [2] so feels like a PR item. The rest of the sources given don't impress me. Oaktree b (talk) 12:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep obviously needs a complete rewrite and shouldn't have been accepted in its current state, but these reviews [3] [4] seem like enough for a NCORP/NPRODUCT pass. – Teratix ₵ 14:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in France

Sports broadcasting contracts in France (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:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and France. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unnecessary list. Shankargb (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Shankargb: Note that "unnecessary" is not a valid deletion rational. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apatia

Apatia (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 notability evident in the article per WP:BAND, mainly just states that they're straight edge and played some concerts. Additionally, I can't find any real coverage on them on the web. InDimensional (talk) 09:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Poland. InDimensional (talk) 09:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I don't know how the nom looked for sources, but they managed to miss and ignore the source cited in the article, from Onet.pl, which meets SIGCOV and is reliable. So that's one - and it calls this band "legendary". Pl wiki lists two more sources, from a notable NGO, which calls one of its albums "cult" ([5]). The band is mentioned in academic works, including in English, ex [6] "most of the best Polish punk bands such as Apatia...". Other Polish sources: [7] (onet again), [8] (Gazeta Wyborcza - Polish main newspaper of record), [9] (Życie Warszawy) I am not going to list more sources, but plenty exist even in English. The nominator deserves a WP:TROUT for terrible execution of WP:BEFORE, since finding sources does not even require speaking Polish (not that these days, with solid machine translation built into most browsers, this should be much of an excuse). PS. That said, the claim about them being mentioned in PWN I could not verify. The article needs improvement, here and on pl wiki, but this is no reason to nuke it. Sources I found here should be enough for anyone who cares to improve this article to get it to DYK level... maybe even I'll do it one day if I find the time. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Webster University campus locations

List of Webster University campus locations (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)

Unencyclopedic content per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Wikipedia is not the Yellow Pages. Also fails WP:NLIST. AusLondonder (talk) 10:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Lists, and United States of America. AusLondonder (talk) 10:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Dmello

John Dmello (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 sources cited in the article for establishing notability (also listed on the talk page) are WP:SPONSORED and WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The list includes articles from India Today, Outlook India, and ANI. Additionally, sources like The New Indian Express and Financial Express are suspected to be sponsored due to lack of authorship. This article was previously soft-deleted via AfD. Grabup (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Grabup (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Goa-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Being an organic farmer in the 21st Century doesn't get you notability. The sourcing reads as PR for the company, which isn't useful here. I don't see any sources we can use, nor do I find any that aren't PR'ish. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zwartbosch Private Nature Reserve

Zwartbosch Private Nature Reserve (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 evidence of notability, tagged since 2019 Greenman (talk) 10:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment and South Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 16:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I cannot find any sources other than maps and Tripadvisor listings. Does not meet [WP:GNG]] nor WP:CORP. LizardJr8 (talk) 16:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Algerian Cup Final referees

Algerian Cup Final referees (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)

Irrelevant article of mostly non-notable people, which doesn't meet WP:GNG. We tend to only have articles like this for major events like FIFA World Cup referees, not for national cup tournaments like this one. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Football, and Algeria. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not relevant for Wikipedia. Geschichte (talk) 12:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:NLIST. Svartner (talk) 18:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Rabbitt

Tim Rabbitt (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)

Local politicians don’t have presumed notability per WP:NPOL and leading the council for a year as Cathaoirleach doesn’t get them past the notability threshold either. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 09:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Ireland. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 09:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Per nom, WP:NPOL and WP:SIGCOV. In terms of NPOL, the role of chair (mayor) of Galway County Council isn't an "international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office". In terms of SIGCOV, the only sources in the article are either primary or the very definition of trivial passing mentions. In my own WP:BEFORE a Google search (which which returns barely 50 results) and a news search (which returns only opinion pieces and passing mentions) does not amount to SIGCOV. Certainly any more than we would expect for any other candidate for a local office. As we (quite correctly) do not have articles for Mayor of Galway County Council or Cathaoirleach of Galway County Council, I do not see how a redirect would be an appropriate WP:ATD. Or draftification or other forms of ATD. Hence the only action I can support is deletion... Guliolopez (talk) 11:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taxila Business School

Taxila Business School (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)

Feels that it doesnt meets NCORP, even before search returns routine coverage. Was declined twice before moved by page creator. Toadette^Edit! 09:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 09:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. AusLondonder (talk) 10:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. AusLondonder (talk) 10:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Knightquest

Knightquest (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 meets WP:NFILM / WP:GNG. Kept at 2006 AfD, but standards were considerably lower then. Boleyn (talk) 08:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Film, Internet, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:NFILM. There's a paragraph in this The Weekly Standard article: [10], doesn't count as significant coverage. --Mika1h (talk) 14:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment If not kept (and I am no sage of SW lore), merge to Cultural impact of Star Wars#Fandom, fan films and fan edits as an ATD. Jclemens (talk) 15:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Association for Competitive Technology

Association for Competitive 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)

fails general notability guideline. every source in the article is primary. ltbdl (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. ltbdl (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Business, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cardboard Castles

Cardboard Castles (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's an AllMusic review, and this book suggests the album charted in the US (if i'm reading it correctly, that is), but beyond that this album doesn't look particularly notable. Unless more is found, I would redirect this to the artist's page. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bubang Techron Co.

Bubang Techron Co. (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 general notability guideline. only source in article is completely unrelated to the subject (and looks like spam). search brings up databases. ltbdl (talk) 07:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and South Korea. ltbdl (talk) 07:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Katsunori Iketani

Katsunori Iketani (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 general notability guideline. current sources in article are databases. search only finds other databases and this, which spells his name 2 different ways...? ltbdl (talk) 07:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Japan. ltbdl (talk) 07:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Ewing

Steve Ewing (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)

Promotional article fails WP:BIO. No content worth merging. Schierbecker (talk) 07:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Schierbecker (talk) 07:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Food and drink, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with The Urge: I don't see extensive coverage outside the band. For all this is, the paragraph can be incorporated into the band's article. Oaktree b (talk) 12:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to The Urge - I am familiar with this singer and he has done nothing independently notable outside his main band. The fact that he owns a restaurant and will be the subject of a film can be mentioned at the band's article, and that's about it. Otherwise this article is clearly a promotional attempt. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gharqad

Gharqad (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)

Hello Wikipedians,

I don't know why we need an article about a biblical plant on Wikipedia. In fact, upon checking further, I didn't find any strong references to this plant in religious scriptures like the Holy Bible or the Holy Quran.

Even this article has a Critical assessment section, where it says that the topic "Gharqad" is insignificant and antisemitic. I fully agree with that, and that's why I believe there is no place for such an insignificant and antisemitic post on Wikipedia. On the other hand, I don't think Wikipedia is a place for expressing any personal research or opinion, so there is no point in having a critical assessment section.

This article itself claims that among the hundreds of books of Islamic hadith narrations, there are only two that actually mention this plant. Even if we think it's an Islamic topic, there are not enough Islamic references. Also, this article proves that two hadiths are misinterpreted with a few points. Again, Wikipedia is not a place for investigating hadith or any religious book.

If we want to consider this article as an article about the Gharqad plant, this article actually confuses the readers. This article provides no specific details on the plant. Instead, it says Nitraria retusa, Nitraria schoberi, Lycium shawii, Lycium schweinfurthii could be some candidates for the gharqad tree. But there is no reference to that. Wikipedia doesn't accept any personal research.

It looks like this article is on the topic of Antisemitism in Islam. In that case, we can move some contents that have proper references to that article.

This is my opinion. I believe this article in this format will mislead people and create more hate towards Jews. This article supports Muslim and Christian extremists to validate their ideologies. On the other hand, for the Zionist moment, it also fuels their ideology that all Muslims are antisemitic.

What do you think about this article? Should we keep it by reformatting properly and removing antisemitic and personal research-based comments, or remove this and move relevant content to the Antisemitism in Islam page?

Thank you. Your valid opinion is needed.

- Sajid (talk) 06:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bible, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine. Sajid (talk) 06:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. https://ar-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/%D8%BA%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%AF?_x_tr_sl=ar&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp The corresponding article in the Arabic Wikipedia treats Gharqad as a synonym for the genus Nitraria, and includes some references that could be added to the English article. The Hebrew Wikipedia article he:ר'רקד also has some references that might be helpful. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am against deletion, here is why

Why is this article nominated for deletion? That topic is extremely discussed; there are religious-studies articles about it, major international newspaper articles about it, vibrant discord about it in the general media and so on.

About some things User:Sajidmahamud835 said above:

• I don't know why we need an article about a biblical plant on Wikipedia

• This plant is by no means biblical, it's hadithic.

• I didn't find any strong references to this plant in religious scriptures like the Holy Bible or the Holy Quran.

• Have you found any references at all in these books? There aren't. Again, it's hadific and hadith is a major literature in Islam.

• This article itself claims that among the hundreds of books of Islamic hadith narrations, there are only two that actually mention this plant. Even if we think it's an Islamic topic, there are not enough Islamic references. Also, this article proves that two hadiths are misinterpreted with a few points. Again, Wikipedia is not a place for investigating hadith or any religious book.

• So what? These are major hadith collections and there are more than two references for this plant in these hadiths; in fact these hadiths are from the broader hadith group of The stones and trees hadiths.

If we want to consider this article as an article about the Gharqad plant, this article actually confuses the readers. This article provides no specific details on the plant. Instead, it says Nitraria retusa, Nitraria schoberi, Lycium shawii, Lycium schweinfurthii could be some candidates for the gharqad tree. But there is no reference to that. Wikipedia doesn't accept any personal research.

• The first versions of the article didn't have this mess; it mentioned only the genuses Nitraria and Lycium.

• It looks like this article is on the topic of Antisemitism in Islam. In that case, we can move some contents that have proper references to that article.

• Why? What is your problem that there would be a single unified article about this, easily maintained in one place by the community?

• This is my opinion. I believe this article in this format will mislead people and create more hate towards Jews. This article supports Muslim and Christian extremists to validate their ideologies. On the other hand, for the Zionist moment, it also fuels their ideology that all Muslims are antisemitic.

• I don't know why you thought about Christian extremists and Zionist extremists because they don't accept this text as sacred but anyway, why would the truth about this concept mislead anyone if that person doesn't believe in a invading version of Islam?

• What do you think about this article? Should we keep it by reformatting properly and removing antisemitic and personal research-based comments, or remove this and move relevant content to the Antisemitism in Islam page?

• How can you make something which is inherantly antisemitic (anti Jewish to be precise) as not antisemetic? I don't think Sunni Muslims will take you seriously if you'll tell them that their books are different than what they evidently are. No need in deleting anything besides maybe the pictures, and summerize the opener passage a bit.

Thanks. 2A10:8012:7:97C7:C80E:5AB0:F714:BE78 (talk) 08:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear fellow contributor,

Firstly, I extend a warm welcome and sincere gratitude for your valuable contributions to Wikipedia. Your input is greatly appreciated.

Thank you for sharing your perspective on this matter. Your insights will certainly be taken into account as we navigate this discussion.

Allow me to address some of the points you raised regarding the deletion discussion:

• Regarding the term "Biblical plant," it's important to note that the term "Bible" encompasses various religious scriptures, not solely those of Christianity. It's analogous to the Quran in Islam. My apologies if this caused any confusion.

• As for the term "Hadithic," I understand your concern. Perhaps "from Hadith tradition" would be a more suitable phrasing to avoid any misinterpretation. Still, is it necessary to have a separate article on a plant from Hadith tradition?

• In Wikipedia, we adhere to strict guidelines regarding sourcing, especially when it comes to religious texts. While Hadith is indeed a significant aspect of Islamic tradition, we must ensure that information is presented in a manner consistent with Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and neutrality.

• The complexity of Hadith presents challenges in citation. While we respect its importance within Islamic scholarship, we must exercise caution in its usage to maintain clarity and avoid misinterpretation. I won't blame you, its common among Muslims to use Hadith as reference, but when its comes to such controversial stuffs, Hadith isn't enough. I am not saying we don't respect Hadith, we just need some verifiable reference. You claimed all Jews will follow the anticrist (Al-Masih ad-Dajjal), who will be pretending as Jesus, and later all of them will be defeated by real Jesus and the [Imam]] of Muslims, this is totaly antisemitic. Its like saying all Jews are bad. We even saw this kind of publication before the The Holocaust.

• As its directly against Jews and makes them look Evil, Wikipedia cannot emphasis this kind of articles. Maybe we can keep some of the contents in Antisemitism in Islam or in the Nitraria article.

• Regarding the mention of specific groups within Islam for example Sunni or Shia, it's crucial to maintain neutrality and avoid privileging one perspective over another. We cannot say 2 hadith book that has mentioned this plant is better than other hundreds of books especially the four books of Shia. Wikipedia strives to present a balanced view that encompasses diverse viewpoints within a topic.

• Regarding the article itself, my intent in initiating this discussion was to address concerns about its overall quality and relevance. Whether through revision, consolidation, or removal, our goal is to ensure that Wikipedia maintains its standards of accuracy and neutrality.

Look, having too many news on something or too many people talking on a topic doesn't make it legitimate to have a dedicated article on that topic in Wikipedia. It will be shame full for Wikipedia if extremists (whatever they are Muslim, Christian, Zionist, Jewish, or Atheist) quote Wikipedia while spreading hate speech. Having this kind of Article will aid them spreading their ideology.

I appreciate your efforts to uphold Wikipedia's standards and your commitment to constructive dialogue. Together, we can work towards a resolution that aligns with Wikipedia's principles and fosters a platform of inclusive knowledge sharing.

Thank you for your continued engagement in this important discussion.

"Warm regards,

Sajid (talk) 11:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sajid, hello. It's hadithic, not biblical or quranic and not anything else and yes "appears in the hadith" is a good phrasing and it's important that there will be an article about it because it's both notable and concerns the life of people and taken seriously by some muslims of the invading version of Islam. I didn't claim anything by myself; it's all there in these hadiths plain and simple and quoted by the letter. I believe the article has strong notability and the community can decide further. Thanks. 2A10:8012:7:97C7:C80E:5AB0:F714:BE78 (talk) 16:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: So what is the policy-based reason that the article should be deleted? Please keep it to a sentence or two, the wall of text above doesn't help. Oaktree b (talk) 12:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello, @Oaktree b ,

  Thank you. Here are the policy-based reasons:

  • Neutral point of view (NPOV): The article may fail to present information in a neutral manner, especially if it contains potentially antisemitic content. Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
  • Verifiability: Content sourced from religious texts like Hadith should be verifiable and presented in a manner consistent with Wikipedia's guidelines. Wikipedia:Verifiability
  • No original research: Content should be based on reliable secondary sources rather than personal interpretation or analysis. Wikipedia:No_original_research

  Also, there is some false information, but that could be fixed. Overall, in my view, its a useless article promoting antisemitism dehumanizing Jews, and telling a story that gives legitimacy to extremists to kill innocent Jews.

  Thank you for your valuable time. I am seeking your opinion on this.

  Regards,

  Sajid (talk) 12:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Not one of these is a deletion criterion. These are criteria for editing, which is what you ought to be doing with this article if you don't approve of it. Central and Adams (talk) 15:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I see no particular problem with this article. gidonb (talk) 12:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello @Gidonb. Thank you for your valuable opinion. Any advice on improving this article to make it better? Sajid (talk) 12:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Since you asked, I would recommend not making any changes. gidonb (talk) 13:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- Ridiculous nomination. Not only do the sources already in the article meet the GNG, but there are plenty more from GScholar which could be included. Nominator should fix the article if they don't approve, but the subject is very, very clearly notable. Central and Adams (talk) 15:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep So, per the explanation above, all can be fixed by editing the article. The sources used all seem to be RS and we have extensive coverage. We don't delete things for simply not being neutral in tone, that can easily be rewritten. Easy !Keep Oaktree b (talk) 15:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep; nom has yet to provide a convincing explanation as to why the article ought to be deleted. Occidental𓍝Phantasmagoria [T/C] 16:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - this discussion should be on the article's talk page, not here. LizardJr8 (talk) 16:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- The "hadith of the Gharqad tree" is semi-notorious in discussions of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and was kind of the emotional centerpiece of the 1988 Hamas charter (it mysteriously went missing in the 2017 version of the charter, after repeated quoting of that passage from the 1988 charter made them sound like crazed Jew-hating loons). AnonMoos (talk) 17:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Avinash Chate

Avinash Chate (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:NBIO and WP:GNG. All sources on the page are regurgitated paid PR articles. A Google search brings up more such paid PR publications. Teemu.cod (talk) 06:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, and India. Teemu.cod (talk) 06:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete - These sources appear to be paid, yet there is no conclusive evidence confirming them as such, as they lack disclaimers and are not featured in the "brandspot" section. The suspicion arises due to the absence of credited authors and the promotional nature of the articles, which deviate from typical news formats. Grabup (talk) 09:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Very PROMO with flowery language in multiple sources. Non-notable corporate communicator person. Oaktree b (talk) 12:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Every news story cited here reads like paid placement. Per WP:NEWSORGINDIA, Indian news sources require careful consideration due to weak controls on advertising and sponsored content, and almost all of the stories would trigger caution (for example, their lack of a bylined author). We should not use the available sources to validate notability under GNG or BIO. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leighton van Wyk

Leighton van Wyk (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 enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 06:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 06:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clinton Theron

Clinton Theron (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)

Rugby BLP that fails WP:GNG. All that comes up in my searches are trivial mentions in match reports and lineup announcements. JTtheOG (talk) 06:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 06:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Book of Mormon places

List of Book of Mormon places (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:gng - one or two of these list items are notable for their own article. There are no secondary sources about places in the book of mormon, leaving this as a partial list as derived by individual interpreters from the book of mormon. This should be deleted until reliable secondary sources write something meaningful here Big Money Threepwood (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Christianity, and Latter Day Saints. Big Money Threepwood (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Valid list, presumably with defined WP:LSC. Not all entries need to be notable, and the presence of Mormon archaeology and Historicity of the Book of Mormon as topics point to these being a sufficiently discussed set to merit inclusion. Jclemens (talk) 08:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blair Kurtz

Blair Kurtz (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)

Played only 3 first grade games. Only sources provided are primary. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 05:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 05:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Most sources are databases or primary sources. Unless more references can be found current coverage isn't sufficient. Mn1548 (talk) 13:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karl Filiga

Karl Filiga (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)

His first grade career was a mere 11 minutes in total. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 05:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, Australia, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 05:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Article has several secondary sources, and by the looks of what is written, he went on to have a career in Australia's second tier. Don't think failing in the NRL is sounds to be classEd as not notable. Article could probably be expanded. Mn1548 (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KZPY-LP

KZPY-LP (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)

Defunct low-power station. No secondary sources at all. No significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 05:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Organizations, Companies, and Oklahoma. AusLondonder (talk) 05:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Searching through google yields results that boil down to either listening to the station or information already included in the article. mwwv(converse) 12:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Algerian Cup semi-finals

Algerian Cup semi-finals (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)

Non-notable topic. 'Algerian Cup semi-finals' is not independently notable outside of the Algerian Cup and an unlikely search term. Merging may not be an option since the whole article is unreferenced. Details of the semi-finals themselves seem to be already covered in individual season articles, although for example 1964–65 Algerian Cup is completely unreferenced as well. C679 04:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. C679 04:54, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Algeria-related deletion discussions. C679 04:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This really is not about notability, season pages are okay for the cup and that covers each semi, this is really not in the WP:SCOPE of how to construct the football content on wikipedia. Govvy (talk) 09:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete don't need a separate articles for semi-finals, they can be covered in other existing articles like the parent article Algerian Cup or the season articles. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Separate articles for finals are understandable, but not for semi-finals. Svartner (talk) 18:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Het Arubaanse Padvindsters Gilde

Het Arubaanse Padvindsters Gilde (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 secondary sourcing--and none that I can't find. Google News offers nothing but Facebook and Wikipedia (GNews, how you have fallen), but there's nothing else I can find, not in the regular search and not in books. It's unfortunate but not all scouting organizations are notable per WP:NCORP. Drmies (talk) 01:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Secondary sources exist (eg [11], [12], [13]), but both my Dutch and my Papiamento skills aren't good enough to include them. The little I understand suggests at least national notability. --jergen (talk) 09:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those prove that the organization exists--these are run of the mill newsy notes on a social club one would expect in a local publication/website. Drmies (talk) 14:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep. Aruba is a really small nation with less than 200,000 inhabitants so "local publication" equals "nationwide publication". In my eyes both criteria of WP:NGO are met. Keep. --jergen (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, this meets all the requirements of the kind of local reporting we usually discredit: a totally mundane event written up in highly promotional language--and that's the best of the three sources. Drmies (talk) 16:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Caribbean. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Waters of Mormon

Waters of Mormon (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 doesn't meet wp:gng What little reference it does have is a passing mention used to describe a plot point. No secondary sources cover this topic in depth. Big Money Threepwood (talk) 04:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Christianity, and Latter Day Saints. Big Money Threepwood (talk) 04:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Before nominating the article for deletion, Big Money Threepwood deleted a list of sources that an earlier edit summary explained "can be used to expand the page". Also, I added the shortened note citations to "Thomas (2016)" that exist on the article and appear to have forgotten to actually add the book to the sources list: John Christopher Thomas, A Pentecostal Reads the Book of Mormon: A Literary and Theological Introduction (CPT Press, 2016). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- There are plenty of sources available via GScholar. Central and Adams (talk) 15:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in the Republic of Ireland

Sports broadcasting contracts in the Republic of Ireland (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:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Ireland. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, I found [14], [15], and [16] which may be helpful in determining notability. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be nice to hear a review of newly found sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Germany

Sports broadcasting contracts in Germany (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:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN. Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability. Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Germany. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. No evidence that these lists are encyclopedic, they've never been discussed as a group in RS. BrigadierG (talk) 00:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rinus Bothma

Rinus Bothma (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 enough coverage of the subject, a South African rugby union player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 04:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and South Africa. JTtheOG (talk) 04:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. No suitable redirect per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Song-nam (footballer)

Hong Song-nam (footballer) (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 fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 03:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Football at the 1976 Summer Olympics – Men's team squads where his name is listed and only known for. Govvy (talk) 09:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Football at the 1976 Summer Olympics – Men's team squads#North Korea per Govvy. GiantSnowman 17:54, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Jin-song

Hong Jin-song (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 fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 03:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 03:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alenga Charles

Alenga Charles (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 comes across as WP:TOOSOON, as the player is young and only getting started. That said, this article clearly fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG as it stands right now. Several searches hardly brought up databases, much less anything of substance. Anwegmann (talk) 03:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Anwegmann (talk) 03:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Tanzania. Kpgjhpjm 04:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 18:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rachid Ghanimi

Rachid Ghanimi (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 can't seem to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV on this player. This might be a WP:TOOSOON situation. In any case, it clearly fails WP:GNG. It was also draftified previously due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV, but the original creator moved the article to mainspace without changing anything. Anwegmann (talk) 03:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Anwegmann (talk) 03:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Morocco. Kpgjhpjm 04:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV . Looking for sources only brings up stat pages like Transfermarkt and fbref . Kpgjhpjm 04:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 17:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 18:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Virginia Lette

Virginia Lette (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)

Most of the coverage I found relates to her being married to cricketer Ed Cowan so WP:NOTINHERITED applies. Found no significant coverage of her or her career to meet WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 02:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Television, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 02:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Music, and Radio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WAST-LP

WAST-LP (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 meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Wisconsin. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I have added several references, most offline to NewsBank (Duluth paper is some of the hardest to obtain anywhere — that can be said of any Forum Communications paper!). There is SIGCOV of its very short-lived news operation. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Each of the sources added by Sammi provide the WP:SIGCOV needed for this subject to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 04:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More review of new sources would be welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alyosha (tank)

Alyosha (tank) (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 notability; lack of WP:RS to establish notability Amigao (talk) 02:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep there is video footage of the tank's actions Salfanto (talk) 12:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or merge to T-80 models. The article is very poorly sourced, and "video footage" is not going to add reliability or credibility (it's easy to fabricate). In the doctrine of Russian military deception there is explicitly a measure named "Disinformation" (дезинформация). Under this measure, Russia actively seeks military advantage by tactics such as "untrue information to journalists". This accompanies concealment, imitation, simulation, and demonstrative manoeuvres (false trails). In other words, denial and deception come as standard in war or peace, and this is war. Do we believe that Putin congratulated some soldiers as heroes, etc? Yes. Do we believe that this was the work of one super-tankish-tank and its heroic crew? Not especially. Is this an encyclopedic article? No. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The purpose of this article is to tell the history of the tank similarly to other articles about named tanks such as Eagle 7 or Bomb Salfanto (talk) 15:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Also I believe that wikipedia is best when not biased to one side Salfanto (talk) 15:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sabado Barkada

Sabado Barkada (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)

Tagged as unreferenced since 2009 but was actually unreferenced since 2006. No good hits on GNews and GBooks. GNews archives only turned out two ads related to it. Alternatively, Redirect to List of programs broadcast by ABS-CBN. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Philippines. Lenticel ^(talk) 02:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Unaegbu

Jeff Unaegbu (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 came about this article during clean up and saw it's contains a bit vague and non verifiable content. Taking into cleaning up, I became tired at the line seeing almost if not all the sources lacks editorial guidelines, perhaps doesn't go with our policy and guidelines for reliable sources.

On the other hand, apart from the quality percentage of primary sources linking to book that were self published in the platforms such as Amazon, etc., the article generally doesn't meet WP:GNG, no WP:SIGCOV, and it contains a bit hoaxes that were made (those like references/acclaims which I have removed when cleaning part of the article). The article in general doesn't conform with Wikipedia's inclusion for authors, journalist too—since he edited a magazine and has written for some magazines per the article. Lacks verifiable source and seem looking like a advert/promotional/vaguely constructed source, and more.

The books he wrote doesn't meet our guidelines for books, so we may try redirecting or WP:PRESERVE albeit there is nothing to be preserved here. I also discovered the previous AFD that reads 'no consensus', and it seems there were no improvement or rather say; the previous AFD seeking for clean up which I've did to some part and found no substantial need for the inclusion of this article. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Nigeria. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marvín A. Santana

Marvín A. Santana (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 establishment of sustained notability using WP:RS Amigao (talk) 01:38, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Dominican Republic, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, same as with Marvín Sántana, Marvin A. Santana, and Marvin Amparo Santana... Hatman31 (talk) 15:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David McGarry

David McGarry (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)

An unsourced article, and there is nothing that I could find online that would allow David McGarry to meet notability requirements for musicians. Cleo Cooper (talk) 01:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Video games, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

University of Colorado Physical Therapy Program

University of Colorado Physical Therapy Program (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)

Despite being a large article, it appears to have been mostly edited by COI editors and contains original research that isn't backed up by sources. The far majority of references are simply from the university's website, and as such notability isn't proven due to the lack of outside sourcing. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 01:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Education, United States of America, and Colorado. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 01:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:19, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - and selectively merge any content with reliable independent sources to University of Colorado School of Medicine. As the nominating editor stated, article seems promo and lacks secondary sources. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 01:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eejit43, thank you for the valuable feedback! I am presently retrieving outside sources to backup the information presented in this article. I am aware of the problem of promotion of interests on WP and how many hide their identity. My hope is that being transparent will help, along with the pending external citations that will demonstrate impact and notability both locally and nationally. Mikepascoe (talk) 13:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all,

• An initial draft of the article had 31 cuanschutz.edu (internal) sources + 23 external (independent) sources = 54 total.
• The present version now has 19 internal + 42 external source = 61 total.
• The percentage of sources from the university website (Eejit43's original comment) has decreased from 57% to 31%.
• Further improvements can be made, thank you for your continued review

Mikepascoe (talk) 14:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I'm not really seeing any SIGCOV from secondary sources. A selective merge might still be the best way forward.-KH-1 (talk) 04:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello, could you please explain what a selective merge is and how this is a good way forward?

  I'm also not sure how to satisfy the SIGCOV (significant coverage?) requirement. There are several external sources discussing the Program now from refutable sources. Do you have an example of a source that meets SIGCOV from other Wikipedia articles?

  Thank you very much! Mikepascoe (talk) 16:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus. It would also help if an editor(s) would address User:Mikepascoe's valid questions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2013 Cotabato City bombing

2013 Cotabato City bombing (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)

All the sources provided are from time of event. Almost 11 years after, no lasting impact or coverage to meet WP:EVENT. Also WP:NOTNEWS applies. LibStar (talk) 01:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, and Philippines. LibStar (talk) 01:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to List of terrorist incidents in the Philippines#2013. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to List of terrorist incidents in the Philippines#2013 per WP:ATD. --Lenticel ^(talk) 20:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tsar (tank)

Tsar (tank) (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 GNG, and appears to be a WP:COATRACK article. The War Zone is the only reference that even mentions this tank in any level of detail, and even then, in an article that only relies on Twitter and Telegram posts, so no RS has covered the subject of this article to any significant degree. Loafiewa (talk) 00:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Loafiewa (talk) 00:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article simply needs more sources. Salfanto (talk) 12:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I say this because the story of the tank is relatively recent Salfanto (talk) 12:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Three questions, mostly directed to Salfanto but any editor may take them up:

1. Do the sources this article simply needs exist? If yes, then please present them here.
2. If the answer to the above question is no, then should we reasonably expect supporting reliable, independent sources demonstrating significant coverage to emerge in the near future? If yes, then this article was created WP:TOOSOON, but userification/draftification might be a viable alternative to deletion until such sources emerge.
3. If the answer to the above question is no, then is a redirect to T-72 operators and variants#Soviet Union and Russia a viable alternative to deletion?

Thanks, IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 16:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for asking these questions.

So far I have found 3 sources which call the tank Tsar.

https://en.defence-ua.com/news/characteristics_of_trophy_russian_tsar_ew_for_t_72b3m_tank_given_by_ukrainian_expert-10115.html

https://interestingengineering.com/military/russia-anti-drone-tank

https://www.twz.com/news-features/ukraine-situation-report-russian-anti-drone-electronic-warfare-tank-captured

Again, tank you for asking me those questions (pun intended) Salfanto (talk) 12:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could we get a review of the sources brought to this discussion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• delete This seems to be a single tank with a bunch of field modifications which got taken a week ago. It's way too soon to think that there is going to be lasting interest in one tank, especially given that the modifications appear not to have worked. Mangoe (talk) 03:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. There are just enough sources to justify the article. Cortador (talk) 11:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I still don't see a consensus here. An interesting question is do we have other articles on other tanks? If so, then may be there is lasting interest in tanks.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: does not meet WP:GNG / WP:NEVENT, for lack of secondary sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Also, WP:NOTNEWS. --K.e.coffman (talk) 07:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gold phosphide

Gold phosphide (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 evidence for existence, while not notable. Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 20:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 20:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might be a bit hasty.

A lack of evidence for existence is not evidence that something does not exist.

If you want to claim that AuP^[1] it isn't a real thing, you really need to cite contemporary work. The citations in the extant article are a wee bit long in the tooth. While the historic claim may have some interesting tidbits someone might dig up, it really is more the fact that there really is such as thing as gold phosphide (even if not AuP, but rather Au₂P₃^[2][3][4]). So the page has some definite need since they are spelled the same, even if they are different things.

Per one site "Gold Phosphide is a used in high power, high frequency applications and in laser diodes." ^[5]

I don't have access to the chemistry literature that this page would require. There isn't anything in PubMed, which includes a lot of primary chemistry literature as well. So it is pretty obscure, but that doesn't mean we cannot make room for it in our hearts, esp. if it plays some important role, e.g. in high power/high frequency laser diodes.

I would suggest making it a chemistry stub/draft and seeing anyone in the chemistry club wants to adopt it.

The PubChem CID 19094837 is not at all convincing. Just as a lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, having an unambiguous identifier for something doesn't mean its real either. The two SIDs 56368501, 162106709 are probably for something real (even if they are the worst entries ever in the history of PubChem). 2601:447:CD7E:7CF0:0:0:0:56AE (talk) 06:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC) (This is User:DrKC MD editing logged out. Binksternet (talk) 04:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)}[reply]

American Elements is NOT a reliable source WP:VENDOR, due to their commercial interest. All the information we can find about it is in archaic literature, when concrete characterization such as X-ray diffraction or even Raman spectroscopy had been developed. I change my stance to rename to gold phosphides to broaden the scope to other actually characterized gold phosphides like Au₂P₃.^[6] Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 16:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Hypothetical compounds can be notable (Xenon octafluoride, Nitrogen pentafluoride, ...), and while the sourcing here is not of the first water, it seems easily sufficient to demonstrate minimum required coverage. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep meets WP:GNG see [17] [18] [19] -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 15:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Is this deletion discussion about something called Gold phosphide or about something with the formula AuP? Most of the hits for the former are for Au₂P₃, and people commenting here have interpreted things in different ways. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This deletion discussion is supposed be something with the formula AuP. Keres🌕Luna ^edits! 16:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly the problem, the sources cited all seem to be talking about different things. References 4 and 5 flatly contradict each other (one says gray solid, one says black with metallic appearance). Hypothetical compounds can be notable but we would have to make the article about a specific compound and be sure our sources reflect that. Since I'm not sure we can do that, I would support a rename to gold phosphides and rewriting of the article; failing that, delete. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk)

• Rename to gold phosphides per previous "keep" and "rename" arguments. Choucas Bleu (T·C) 16:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Evangelista shooting

Camp Evangelista shooting (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)

All the sources provided are from time of event. No lasting impact or coverage to meet WP:EVENT. Also WP:NOTNEWS applies. LibStar (talk) 01:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, and Philippines. LibStar (talk) 01:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the location it occurred in its own section at Camp Evangelista. Its closest claim to notability is making the army reevaluate some of their practices. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Maree

Josh Maree (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 enough coverage of the subject, an Australian rugby league player, to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT. JTtheOG (talk) 19:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, Lebanon, and Australia. JTtheOG (talk) 19:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Rugby League footballer who played for Lebanon at the Rugby League World. 8 sources.Fleets (talk) 20:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The quality of the sources has to be addressed. Geschichte (talk) 06:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirecting to 2021 Men's Rugby League World Cup squads is an WP:ATD. On that page, one will find his club and cap count at the time (I don't know why rugby doesn't put DoB as well, like football squads). @JTtheOG, note that several other of the Lebanese 2021 World Cup pages are of the exact same build as Josh Maree. Geschichte (talk) 06:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Played in a team that got to a WC QF, nothing is written about his club career, needs expansion. Mn1548 (talk) 16:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per above. No evidence of the requisite GNG coverage, merely playing in some league does not meet any notability criterion. JoelleJay (talk) 01:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Specialty Hospital, Jordan

Specialty Hospital, Jordan (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)

Previously deleted and salted at Specialty Hospital. The only sources here are press releases, the hospital's self-written description, and some kind of advertorial. I can't find much online for this case. Cleo Cooper (talk) 01:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Jordan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 In. Women

Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 In. Women (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)

Nothing in the article or my BEFORE suggests this meets WP:GNG (or WP:NFILM). Nothing in GBooks or GScholar (well, one mention in a German book?). Maybe there is some coverage in National Lampoon (magazine) ( September/October 1994), but it is a parody magazine, so not sure if it is reliable, and even if there is something there, GNG requires multiple sources (so at least one more). Can anyone find anything to rescue this - or failing that, suggest a valid redirect target? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Piotrus, I should think that even if the National Lampoon is a satirical magazine, it is significant coverage. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC) Forget what I said, it's obviously a primary source....-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Added a few things. A redirect (many targets can be considered) is also possible. Opposed to Deletion. Thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Besides the reviews already in the article, there's this, this, this, this and this which is enough for GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 10:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Can't find independent sources. Does not pass WP:GNG Hkkingg (talk) 10:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Hkkingg Take a look at what @Somebodyidkfkdt found. It looks promising, although sadly the last three seem to be empty? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  TWL doesn't provide access to the last three unfortunately. There's also this, this, this and this. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 12:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A review of newly found sources would be helpful. What would the redirect target article be?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There are just two significant articles on this movie (that I can find). One is a full paragraph in TV Guide from 8/20/1994. The other is the LA Times article, which is genuinely substantial. This movie gets continued brief mentions in video guides, but almost nothing else. Hard to see this coming even close to meeting WP:NFILM Oblivy (talk) 03:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oblivy Did you look at the sources found above? And are the sources you found oline and linkable for others to review? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus sorry I just did. The Entertainment Tonight article is lengthy, but I don't know if it counts towards the nationally known critics factor. The TV guide article is paywalled above but another TV guide article from the same date is here[20]. The video guides are available at archive.org. Oblivy (talk) 04:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oblivy Playing the devil's advocate (since I am the nom), I think that we have enough sources to show this meets GNG with SIGCOV, although I did not access your sources (but coverage in LA Time, which you call substantial, is pretty good). I'll ping User:Cunard in case he can locate it and quote it/link it. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, LA times is source #3. Oblivy (talk) 05:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beam Invader

Beam Invader (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)

Lack of notability, I was unable to find any reliable sources indicating notability. DePRODded with the rationale that the article could be merged or redirected to something, I don't think there's any suitable redirect target as there are many Space Invaders clones and I don't think a non-notable one is suitable to mention on the article for Space Invaders. Waxworker (talk) 20:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Waxworker (talk) 20:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to List of Space Invaders video games as preferred WP:ATD. Sorry, I included the wrong link in my deprod comment. ~Kvng (talk) 12:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - having previously worked on getting both Space Invaders and List of Space Invaders video games to featured status, I can say that I did not come across this game in my research. To be fair, I wasn't searching for specific clones, but I would imagine that even a passing mention would have popped up if it was a little notable. As the list is intended only for official Space Invaders games, I don't think merging a clone into the list would be the right move. We'd still have to prove notability for inclusion because there were many clones and we can't make a unsourced catalog of clone games. My two cents. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]
• Comment: From jp-wiki and elsewhere, company appears to have also been written "Technon/Teknon" & "Kogyu" or "テクノン コウギョウ" or "テクノン工業". Game also written "ビーム・インベーダー". It is mentioned at [21] & [22], but those are both recent. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 09:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Could also fall under WP:NOTINHERITED, and it's not worthy of merging with Space Invaders either. When I worked on Space Harrier many years ago I learned about multiple clones of the game that were produced, and none of them stood on their own merits. The same applies in this instance. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 20:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1950 Philippine Air Lines DC-3 disappearance

1950 Philippine Air Lines DC-3 disappearance (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 the page creator's own admission, there is little information about this event. I quote: "This would be peculiar due to the lack of info, with only airframe records mostly available. Currently I have not been able to find more info on the flight itself."

I have been unable to find any coverage at all in secondary sources; all sourcing in the article is from databases. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Philippines. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

World-Wide Spectrum Efficiency

World-Wide Spectrum Efficiency (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)

Potentially un-notable, does not cite any sources (and has not since 2021), uses the wrong tone. Though tone is less of an issue, and non-notability and no sources are the big one thetechie@wikimedia: ~/talk/ $ 00:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep but burn to the ground and rewrite. This group does seem to have been discussed widely back around 2004-05: [23], [24], [25] (note that the CNet article was long before Red Ventures turned the site into an AI-generated garbage heap). The coverage may not quite be "significant" in all cases, but is there. Regardless, the article is absolutely awful and is inexcusable in its current form. Also, note that more recently the abbreviation WWiSE has been used for an unrelated software package: [26]. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 00:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting this discussion as there is no consensus and low participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I have reworked it and added sources identified by WeirdNAnnoyed. ~Kvng (talk) 15:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The lead still isn't enough though. It just cuts straight to "Two industry "Pre-N" groups, TGnSync and the World-Wide Spectrum Efficiency (WWiSE), were formed". No identifying sentence. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 15:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @TheTechie, Do you have a suggested improvement? Also, WP:NOTCLEANUP. ~Kvng (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep But absolutely crummy stub. Needs a total rewrite. X (talk) 19:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Huntertown IN seal.jpg

File:Huntertown IN seal.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by Davodd (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

Dubious own-work claim. It's unclear if this seal is old enough to qualify for PD status. ✗plicit 05:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Get Ready For This - 2 Unlimited.ogg

File:Get Ready For This - 2 Unlimited.ogg (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by The lorax (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

De-PRODding rationale was this: Music sample should NOT be deleted as it is necessary to understand the article. Unfortunately, necessity rationale doesn't absolve the sample's potential failure to prove why omitting the sample harms the understanding of the whole song, the omission one part of WP:NFCC#8. The song was initially a composition, but then lyrics were added in another recording.

The whole sample is just music with one spoken line, and its role is the same as what free text already does: drive readers into seeking and then listening (versions of) the whole song. Furthermore, it doesn't fully represent (what) the whole song/composition (is about) and (how) the whole song/composition (had been done). George Ho (talk) 05:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The brief clip is shorter than most fair use audio commonly featured on Wikipedia, and I would argue is fairly representative of the entire song. The lorax (talk) 04:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Length of the sample isn't the main issue. The riff heard in the sample doesn't provide enough context about the entire song unless reliable sources prove its significance. So far, I haven't found sources substantially covering the riff and its significance to the song. George Ho (talk) 06:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:NamibiaCGA.png

File:NamibiaCGA.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 718 Bot (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is not the logo of the Namibian team, it is the logo of the Namibia Commonwealth Games Association (which doesn't have an article), and thus fails WP:NFCC#8. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Commonwealth Games New Zealand.png

File:Commonwealth Games New Zealand.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 718 Bot (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is not the logo of the New Zealand team, it is the logo of the New Zealand Commonwealth Games Association (which doesn't have an article), and thus fails WP:NFCC#8. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SEYCGA.png

File:SEYCGA.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 718 Bot (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is not the logo of the Seychelles team, it is the logo of the Seychelles Commonwealth Games Association (which doesn't have an article), and thus fails WP:NFCC#8. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vanuatu Commonwealth Games.png

File:Vanuatu Commonwealth Games.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs) – uploaded by 718 Bot (notify | contribs | uploads | upload log). 

This is not the logo of the Vanuatu team, it is the logo of the Vanuatu Commonwealth Games Association (which doesn't have an article), and thus fails WP:NFCC#8. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NEW NOMINATIONS

Category:Archaeological organizations based in the Republic of Ireland

Category:Tigers in Meitei culture

• Propose deleting Category:Tigers in Meitei culture (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: WP:TRIVIALCAT PepperBeast (talk) 02:25, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Not sure, there is also Category:Tigers in popular culture. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This seems to be about fictional or mythical tigers in Meitei culture, which would not exist if not for the Meitei culture, so this seems to be WP:DEFINING. NLeeuw (talk) 19:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Mohave tribe

• Propose renaming Category:Mohave tribe to Category:Mohave

Nominator's rationle: The Mohave people belong to two tribes, the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe and the Colorado River Indian Tribes. The current name implies that the Mohave people belong to a single tribe. Rename for accuracy. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 20:19, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments I guess the proposed move is an improvement, although the fact that people belong to two different federally recognized tribes does not prevent them belonging to a single (non federally recognized) tribe. It is best to forestall readers drawing the inference, even if it is an invalid inference, hence deleting "peopletribe"† from the name is an improvement. OTOH article Mohave is currently a dab, so the shorter name may be ambiguous. I ask whether Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America has (or ought to have) any standard/guideline for category (and corresponding article) names —— e.g. capitalization; legal name vs common name; and group taxonomy labels (e.g. "people" vs "nation" vs "tribe" vs nothing; always vs disambiguation vs never). From browsing, I infer that "Category:Foo people" is the standard for subcats of Category:Native American people by tribe, so Category:Mohave people is about individuals (plural "people") whereas Mohave people is about the group (singular "people"). (The fact that Category:Mohave people is a subcat of Category:Native American people by tribe also seems to imply, contra the nomination, that that the Mohave people are in some sense a tribe.) jnestorius^(talk) 23:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • † corrected myself: current name is "Mohave tribe", not "Mohave people" jnestorius^(talk) 22:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Regardless whether it is renamed or not, shouldn't we convert the category page to a disambiguation page just like in article space? Marcocapelle (talk) 06:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jnestorius Being a people is not the same as being a tribe. EG, the article for Cherokee refers to them as an Indigenous people belonging to three tribes; the Cherokee Nation, the Eastern Band, and the United Keetoowah Band. Mohave peoplehood doesn't imply being a single tribe. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 11:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the article for Cherokee refers to them as an Indigenous people belonging to three tribes No, it says "three Cherokee tribes are federally recognized", not the same thing. It also says 'By the 19th century, White American settlers had classified the Cherokee of the Southeast as one of the "Five Civilized Tribes"'. Five Civilized Tribes says "The term Five Civilized Tribes was applied ... to the five major Native American nations in the Southeast". Category:Cherokee people is a direct subcat of Category:Native American people by tribe. Article Tribe (Native American) says "In the United States, an American Indian tribe, Native American tribe, Alaska Native village, Indigenous tribe or Tribal nation may be any current or historical tribe, band, nation, or community of Native Americans in the United States. ... Many terms used to describe Indigenous peoples of the United States are contested but have legal definitions that are not always understood by the general public." We have a variety of words (tribe, band, nation, community, people, ...) used variously across different articles and categories, sometimes in accordance with a US federal legal definition, sometimes in a different sense used by ethnologists or historians; sometimes meaning an ethnic group, sometimes a subcomponent of an ethnic group split out by geography, administration, or something else. Are you implying that Wikipedia article/category titles should always used words in the sense given to them by U.S. federal law? That is certainly not true in general; it may be the consensus for WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America but I have not seen evidence of that yet. jnestorius^(talk) 13:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support for simiplicity's sake, although Category:Mojave would be even better. "tribe" lowercased isn't a problem, so not enthusiastic about massive renaming of all Foo tribe categories. Yuchitown (talk) 23:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments in general would be appreciated, but in particular input on whether this should be a {{category disambiguation}} and the precise new name – if it is to be renamed – whether the new name should be "Mohave" or "Mojave".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy rename to Category:Mohave people per WP:C2D. The main article is Mohave people. Let's not make it needlessly complicated. NLeeuw (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Your proposed new name is not available, because it is an existing subcategory. Are you suggesting merging the two? In general we have separate categories for an ethnicity and for people who have that ethnicity; merging them only makes sense if they are both small. jnestorius^(talk) 17:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hmmm now that you mention it, yes. The subcategory (created February 2023) has only 3 articles and a subsubcategory with 2 articles.

  Step 1: Upmerge Category:Mohave people (3 P) and Category:Colorado River Indian Tribes people (2 P) to Category:Mohave tribe per WP:MFN.

  Step 2: Rename Category:Mohave tribe to Category:Mohave people per WP:C2D. NLeeuw (talk) 04:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Fwiw, step 1 and 2 can be combined by merging Category:Mohave tribe and Category:Colorado River Indian Tribes people to Category:Mohave people. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dutch cookies

• Propose deleting Category:Dutch cookies (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: overcategorization, attempt to empty the categories cookie and Dutch cuisine. The Banner talk 07:23, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• If not kept then at least merge to Category:Cookies and Category:Dutch confectionery. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The articles in that category were original part of both categories you have mentioned. Hence the overcategorization-claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Banner (talk • contribs) 15:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as category creator. What makes this over categorization? Categorizing foods by their national origin is a fairly standard practice as can be seen by container categories such as Category:Pastries_by_country, Category:Doughnuts by country, and Category:Cakes by country. BaduFerreira (talk) 14:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film controversies in Spain

• Propose deleting Category:Film controversies in Spain (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: All 4 items are articles about the films themselves. Follow-up to previous CfDs finding that the controversy should be the subject of a stand-alone article, and not just a (sub)section in the article about the film itself.

Precedents:

• Articles about films themselves cannot be labelled "controversial" per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. Category:Controversial films has been repeatedly deleted (last in 2008).
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 October 1#Category:Film controversies: keep. There also appears to be consensus that articles about the films themselves should not be placed in this category.
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 October 23#Category:Christmas film controversies (deleted)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 October 23#Category:Adventure film controversies (deleted)
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 March 5#Category:Animation controversies in film (films purged, remainder merged to Category:Film controversies).

That also applies here. Should a sufficient number of stand-alone articles about film controversies in Spain be written, this category can be re-created without prejudice. NLeeuw (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural oppose. I would note that there are 59 other sibling categories in Category:Film controversies by country, and all of them are populated almost entirely by "the films themselves" rather than "stand-alone" articles about the controversies as separate topics. So I'm unclear on why this would be different than all of the others — either they're all problematic for the same reasons and need to be collectively considered together, or this is as valid as the others, and there's no legitimate reason to single this one out for different treatment than the others.
  As well, most of the "precedents" listed above aren't particularly relevant here — Christmas, adventure and animation didn't get deleted on the grounds that it was fundamentally improper to categorize films as "controversial", they got deleted on the grounds that the intersection of controversy with genre wasn't defining. So I'm not at all wedded to the need for this, but those categories have nothing to do with it because they're not the same issue in the slightest. Bearcat (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Fair points. In my defence, I didn't intend to single out Spain and spare all other countries in the world; I was just busy improving the Category:Culture of Spain tree, as you can see.

  Per WP:OTHERSTUFF, feel free to follow-up nominate all other categories populated only by articles about the films and not stand-alone articles on the controversies they created. I did not intend setting a higher standard for Spain; if we conclude this category is improper, or at least improperly populated at the moment, that should evidently apply to all children of Category:Film controversies by country. NLeeuw (talk) 19:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 18:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• While I understand that we cannot single out one country, I would encourage a broader nomination. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Food gods

• Propose merging Category:Food gods to Category:Agricultural gods
• Propose merging Category:Harvest gods to Category:Agricultural gods
• Propose merging Category:Food goddesses to Category:Agricultural goddesses
• Propose merging Category:Harvest goddesses to Category:Agricultural goddesses
• Propose merging Category:Food deities to Category:Agricultural deities
• Propose merging Category:Harvest deities to Category:Agricultural deities

Nominator's rationale: WP:OVERLAPCAT PepperBeast (talk) 11:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merging Category:Harvest deities to Category:Agricultural deities, but keep Category:Food deities instead of merging it, I think the Food gods/goddesses are related but not the exact same thing as Agricultural gods/goddesses. AHI-3000 (talk) 21:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In principle, I agree with you, but all the deities I checked that are currently categorized as food gods/goddesses/deities are actually harvest/agriculture gods. PepperBeast (talk) 00:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge for Food deities agree with @AHI-3000, The Hindu goddess Annapurna (goddess) is the goddess of food, but is unrelated to Agriculture. Phosop is the goddess of rice, not agriculture in general. Mellona is the goddess of apples. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. NLeeuw (talk) 19:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted per this request at my talk page (previously closed as "merge").
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 16:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Even if we keep Category:Food gods then most entries should still be moved from there to Category:Agricultural gods. An alternative is to merge and rename to Category:Agriculture and food gods. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Food and agricultural/ Harvest are two different characteristics. There is many agricultural/harvest deities, who are also related to Grain, thus food. There are other overlaps also. Many agricultural deities are also fertility deities as they make humans and the land fertile. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 14:24, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 17:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:USA for Africa songs

• Propose deleting Category:USA for Africa songs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Propose deleting Category:USA for Africa albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Categories containing only 1 article. Unlikely to be expanded since the group has been inactive for 40 years. Mika1h (talk) 12:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See comment by Pppery.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep While not a guideline, there is consensus per WP:ALBUMSTYLE "that a category for an artist's albums should be created even if they have only released one album (irrespective of whether they are likely to release more in the future)." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk • contribs) 18:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian military personnel from Kelowna

• Propose merging Category:Canadian military personnel from Kelowna to Category:Canadian military personnel from British Columbia and Category:People from Kelowna

Nominator's rationale: Overcategorization by location. While a few Canadian cities do have "Military personnel from City" categories (but not "Canadian military personnel from City"), there's no comprehensive scheme in place of doing this across the board for all cities — they otherwise exist only for the major megacities with populations of half a million or more, whose base "People from City" categories were overpopulated into the hundreds or thousands and needed diffusion for size control, and not for every city across the board. But with just 67 articles in Category:Canadian military personnel from British Columbia and just six in Category:People from Kelowna, neither of the parent categories are large enough to need this for diffusability. There's no particularly unique relationship between military service and being from Kelowna per se, so this isn't needed for just three people if other Canadian cities in Kelowna's weight class (Lethbridge, Regina, Saskatoon, Thunder Bay, Sudbury, Gatineau, Sherbrooke, Moncton, etc.) don't have the same. Bearcat (talk) 14:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree Kelowna is the third largest locality in BC. Uncontroversial categories exist for the two largest localities (Vancouver and Victoria). It already has three entries which is often considered the criterion for a category, and is likely to gain more in the future as more biographies are created. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, the standard minimum size for a category is normally five, not three, and even then size alone doesn't automatically trump other considerations. A category that is failing or violating other rules isn't exempted from those other rules just because you can get its size to five per se.

Secondly, "(Canadian) military personnel" categories don't exist for either Vancouver or Victoria at all yet, so I don't know what you even think you're talking about with that argument.

Thirdly, it's not "ordinal size rank within province" that determines whether such a category is warranted in this tree, but "is the base people-from category large enough to need diffusion or not" — which with just six people in it now and only nine even if these get upmerged to it (well, actually eight, because one of these three people is already in a different occupational subcategory as it is), Kelowna's is not. At present, these categories exist only for big cities where an undifferentiated "People from" category without occupational subcategories would be populated past the 500-article or 1,000-article marks, which is not where Kelowna is sitting, and they do not automatically exist as a matter of course for every small or medium city that had one, two or three military people come from there.

My mistake on thinking there was a category for military personnel from Victoria and Vancouver. It is actually Category:Writers from British Columbia that includes those two cities, and now (since I created it) Kelowna. Which is a good reason to think maybe they should all be in a category, rather than ruling out Kelowna because the other two haven't been created yet.

I could add Trevor Cadieu from Vernon, which is on the same lake as Kelowna and with city limits separated by ~10 km, possibly considered a suburb. Also since this nom, I discovered that George Randolph Pearkes served with the BC Dragoons which is a Kelowna reserve unit (Okanagan Military Museum). I don't want to change the categories of either bio right now in case this is an error and would be perceived as gaming this nom. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Found one more notable definitely described as "from Kelowna" by Okanagan Military Museum: Rodney Frederick Leopold Keller. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The smallest other city with a sibling category is both (a) four times Kelowna's size, and (b) about 80 years older than Kelowna, both adding up to the fact it has several hundred more articles in its "People from" tree than Kelowna does, and thus needs to be diffused more than Kelowna's does. Bearcat (talk) 15:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 17:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBT-related music

• Propose renaming Category:LGBT-related music to Category:LGBT music

Nominator's rationale: An odd entry in Category:LGBT arts, because of the "-related" adjective not shared by any parent category (but shared by some subcategories that may need to be renamed as well). Sister categories at that level (in LGBT arts) are just LGBT dance, LGBT literature, LGBT arts organizations, LGBT theatre, and LGBT art‎. No "-related" anywhere there. Another option would be to rename everything to the form of 'X about Y", although I am not sure if "about LGBT" sounds best (ex. "Music about LGBT"?). For now, removing "-related" from that tree might be easiest in terms of standardization. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, I guess it is called "-related" because it also contains LGBT musicians and LGBT musical groups subcategories with artists who do not all create LGBT content. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I would note that the category is named the way it is because CFD previously renamed it from the proposed new name to the existing one on the grounds that the music itself doesn't have its own innate sexual orientation, but is merely contextually related to the sexual orientations of people. I would further note things like Category:LGBT-related films, Category:LGBT-related television shows and Category:LGBT-related books, which are also categorized as "LGBT-related", and not just as "LGBT", for the same reason, which means there's a mixture of "LGBT" vs. "LGBT-related" among its siblings rather than this being a one-off outlier. It's a complicated question, for sure, but the reason it's named this way is because of a prior CFD discussion on it, so it's not nearly as clearcut as the nominator makes it out to be. Bearcat (talk) 15:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Weak keep based on the names of the sibling categories that Bearcat mentions. Mason (talk) 03:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 17:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Songs against capitalism

• Propose renaming Category:Songs against capitalism to Category:Songs about capitalism

Nominator's rationale: Generally, our songs by topic categories are 'about' not 'against'. Ex. Category:Songs about poverty. This is also subcat to Category:Songs about consumerism, not Category:Songs against consumerism... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Lean to delete, it is quite a stretch to say that these songs are about capitalism. I found several that are just critical of modern society in general, some others about the labour movement. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Perhaps could be saved after pruning, if anyone can indeed show a song about capitalism. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. I can understand why one ould argue that should be deleted because of the nebulous nature, but it is pretty clear that many of these songs have lyrics that are anti-capitalist. Velociraptor888 (talk) 23:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• No, it is not clear at all. It relies very much on subjective judgement. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 17:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dos Santos family (Angolan business family)

• Propose renaming Category:Dos Santos family (Angolan business family) to Category:Dos Santos family

Nominator's rationale: No need for disambiguation. User:Namiba 00:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Not sure. Many people are called (dos) Santos (surname) and there is no Dos Santos family main article. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 17:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No opposition to deletion or, alternatively, renaming for the family patriarch and Angolan president José Eduardo dos Santos category:José Eduardo dos Santos. Do you have a preference Marcocapelle?--User:Namiba 18:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• It would be clearest to have this as Category:Family of José Eduardo dos Santos. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Recipients of the Padma Shri in literature & education

Convert Category:Recipients of the Padma Shri in literature & education to article List of Recipients of the Padma Shri in literature and education

Nominator's rationale: WP:NONDEF. Should probably be listified. PepperBeast (talk) 19:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:OCAWARD. Lists already exist, starting with List of Padma Shri award recipients (1954–1959). Marcocapelle (talk) 20:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as this awards are defining characteristic of recipients and they are frequently labelled as Padma Awardee in references. Another reason is lists of Padma awardees are not by their fields but by year. Each list contains all awardee of all field in a year. So field-wise categories help to find awardees in perticular field too like above literature and education.-Nizil (talk) 11:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 17:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Burials in Quito

• Propose deleting Category:Burials in Quito (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: delete, we normally categorize burials only by place of burial e.g. by cemetery, not by geographic places. A geographic place is either where the person lived, in that case they should just be in a "Peoples from" category. Or else it is a random place, e.g. the place of the hospital where they died, which is not defining. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Atari 8-bit family games

• Propose renaming Category:Atari 8-bit family games to Category:Atari 8-bit computer games

Nominator's rationale: Article has recently gone through a name change to Atari 8-bit computers. This category should reflect that. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Screwball pitchers

• Propose deleting Category:Screwball pitchers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: In baseball, unlike knuckleball pitchers who are utterly unique and stand apart from all other pitchers, its actually hard to tell screwball pitchers apart from someone throwing a circle changeup so people who never threw one are in here. And while throwing a real screwball is uncommon, they aren't so rare as to warrant a category of their own - certainly not as rare as knuckleball pitchers. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Unlike knuckleball pitchers, throwing a screwball is not a defining characteristic. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:MIT Engineers seasons

• Propose merging Category:MIT Engineers seasons to Category:MIT Engineers

Nominator's rationale: Only one subcategory. Let'srun (talk) 11:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Just delete, the subcategory still remains part of Category:MIT Engineers ice hockey. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Feminist historians

• Propose merging Category:Feminist historians to Category:Women's historians

Nominator's rationale: merge to clarify that this is about women's history rather than a category of historians who happen to support feminism. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't this one be more specific to Historians of feminism? Mason (talk) 22:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I would be perfectly ok with creating a subCategory:Historians of feminism. Just renaming the nominated category to Category:Historians of feminism is currently not possible however because not all entries of this category would belong there. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I don't think these are the same scope. I'm leaning Keep. NLeeuw (talk) 10:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 00:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Flemish sinologists

• Propose merging Category:Flemish sinologists to Category:Flemish orientalists

Nominator's rationale: Non-defning intersection between ethnicity (flemish) and subspecialization. Single merge because the only person in the category is already in the French sinologists category. Mason (talk) 04:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Algerian Berber feminists

• Propose merging Category:Algerian Berber feminists to Category:Berber feminists and Category:Algerian feminists and Category:Berber Algerians

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection between ethnicity, political orientation, and nationality. If not merged, rename to Berber Algerian feminists. to match parent Berber Algerians Mason (talk) 03:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Czech-Polish translators

Category:Russian meat dishes

• Propose deleting Category:Russian meat dishes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Redundant layer. Upmerge Russian chicken dishes to Russian cuisine. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 00:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Irreducible manifold

• Irreducible manifold → Prime manifold#Irreducible manifold  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Reducible manifold → Irreducibility (mathematics)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These should point at the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Fort Blakely and Spanish Fort

• Battle of Fort Blakely and Spanish Fort → Battle of Fort Blakeley  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:XY, Battle of Spanish Fort is a separate article; both battles/forts are mentioned in both articles, so there is no obvious target, and Battle of Spanish Fort occurred first, making the order confusing. Moreover, Fort Blakeley is misspelled. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hulks

• Hulks → Hulk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The characters have no plural form, so should we retarget to Hulk (disambiguation), soft redirect to wiktionary:hulks, or delete? 176.42.16.148 (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Druggie

• Druggie → Addiction#Drug addiction  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

For possible deletion, or maybe a redirect to a page which discusses the slur rather than the addiction. Note that this initially redirected to Substance dependence; I changed it to the current redirect to fit with drug addict GnocchiFan (talk) 20:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of appommatox courthouse

• Battle of appommatox courthouse → Battle of Appomattox Court House  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The misspelling combined with the miscapitalization make this not very useful. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep "Courthouse" and "Court House" are variant spellings, and it isn't too surprising that someone would type it in lowercase. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but Appomattox is also misspelled. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dextette

• Dextette → Gameplay of Pokémon#Pok.C3.A9dex  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

i thought it was a peachette deal, but it's not even that. two characters in the gen 3 anime refer to the pokédex as that sometimes maybe probably, and that's as far as it seems to go cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boulder Badge

• Boulder Badge → Gameplay of Pokémon#Pokémon Gyms  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

that's brock's badge, for context. not notable on its own, aside from how boring it looks, and this probably wouldn't be the right target anyway cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to recommend retargeting to Brock (Pokémon), but it somehow doesn't mention the Boulder Badge by name. Which is exceedingly odd? You'd think that'd be one of the more notable details about the character, the fact that he's a gym leader that gives out the Boulder Badge. The entire article needs a coat of Rock Polish anyways tbh... 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aku Type

• Aku Type → Gameplay of Pokémon#Pokémon types  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

what cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i did some looking, and it's a word in some languages, and could refer to the fire, water, electric, and dark types, given some mental gymnastics, but it's mostly an informal-ish first person pronoun. no idea what basis i think this should be deleted on, but i want this gone cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokédex (Sinnoh)

• Pokédex (Sinnoh) → Gameplay of Pokémon#Pokédex  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

retarget to the list of gen 4 pokémon? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Sinnoh Pokédex doesn't only include Gen 4 pokémon, but it isn't unlikely that someone would be looking for these specifically when typing it. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Full Pokedex

• Full Pokedex → Gameplay of Pokémon#Pokédex  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

retarget to the list of pokémon or delete, this ain't the full pokédex cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bird Pokémon

• Bird Pokémon → Gameplay of Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bird Pokemon → Gameplay of Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

not sure if this is referring to bird pokémon (like corviknight and the worse corviknight), in which case i'd say retarget to the list of pokémon or delete (more so delete) or to the unused bird type, in which case redirect to missingno without a second or first thought cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List Of Legendary Pokémon

• List Of Legendary Pokemon → Gameplay of Pokémon#Legendary Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• List of Legendary Pokemon → Gameplay of Pokémon#Legendary Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

i'd say retarget to the list of pokémon, even though it's a list of all the pokémon cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support There isn't even a Legendary Pokémon anchor at the current target, while List of Pokémon does have legendary pokémon indicated. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weather Legendary Pokémon

• Weather Legendary Pokémon → Gameplay of Pokémon#Legendary Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Weather Legendary Pokemon → Gameplay of Pokémon#Legendary Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

i'd say retarget to kyogre, as it's the first in the weather trio cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Retargeting to List of generation III Pokémon#Kyogre shows the whole Weather Trio on the page. Again, current anchor is non-existent. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon Master

• Pokémon Master → Gameplay of Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Pokemon Master → Gameplay of Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Pokémon master → Gameplay of Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

is this really the best place to target, as opposed to pokémon masters ex? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon Crystal Health Items list

• Pokémon Crystal Health Items list → Gameplay of Pokémon#Items  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Pokemon Crystal Health Items list → Gameplay of Pokémon#Items  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

not a list of health items (whatever that's supposed to mean), or focused specifically on crystal cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legendary Pokémon

• Legendary Pokémon → Gameplay of Pokémon#Legendary Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Legendary Pokemon → Gameplay of Pokémon#Legendary Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Legendary pokémon → Gameplay of Pokémon#Legendary Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Ledgendary pokemon → Gameplay of Pokémon#Legendary Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

maybe retarget to the list of pokémon as with mythical pokémon? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to match Mythical Pokémon as per Cogsan. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

just noticed the 4rd one has a minor spelling mistake, should it be deleted? i'd say delete cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hazeltown

• Hazeltown → Haselstauden  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is not attested anywhere, and its addition to the article was solely referenced to the article's "version history". 1234qwer1234qwer4 12:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Just added a {{cn}} at the target. The article was titled Hazeltown and mention has been there right from the first edit in 2008 - Keep as long as the mention is there. Jay 💬 13:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: any thoughts on keeping the redrect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete due to lack of attestation; just because something has been there since 2008 doesn't mean it's right. (Of course, just because something cannot be cited doesn't mean it isn't true - but it does mean we should exclude it and the redirect from Wikipedia until we're 100% sure). --GnocchiFan (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Province of Bessarabia

• The Province of Bessarabia → Budjak  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Province of Bessarabia → Budjak  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nonsense redirects. Bessarabia is a region in Eastern Europe. Budjak is a subset of it. Super Ψ Dro 12:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget both to Bessarabia Governorate. "Province" appears to be an alternative translation (see [27], [28], etc.) - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  In both links you gave province is not capitalized, there is no proper names but a descriptive combination of words. There was also Bessarabia Governorate (Romania) by the way. We could disambiguate but I see it as really unnecessary. Also, come on, The Province of Bessarabia is completely implausible, it should be deleted. Super Ψ Dro 23:25, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Does it matter if it's not capitalized in the specific sources I found? It will still be a plausible search term. I thought about disambiguation, but I think the hatnote at the proposed target is sufficient. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 03:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I think the key word in the nominating statement is: "is". Bessarabia is a larger region in Eastern Europe. However, it appears that it was a smaller Turkish province/governate/eyalet, from the late 15th century through the early 19th century. Here's the article as it stood before being redirected in 2005:

  The Province of Bessarabia or Besarabya pashalyk in Turkish, was an Ottoman province from 1478 to 1812. Its size varied, however by 1600, it included the towns of Cetatea Alba, Izmail, Tighina, and Kilia.
  The Ottoman Province of Bassarabia was annexed by the Russian Empire in 1812, along with all Moldovan territory east of the Prut river, which the Russians governed jointly in one single Russian province of Bessarabia.
  The Ottoman Province, only, is more or less the same size as the territory of modern-day Bugeac, which is currently part of the Ukrainian Odessa oblast.

  This is uncited but sounds plausible, and it aligns with the bit in Budjak#Name and geography (i.e., the redirect's target) that uses the name historic Bessarabia. There are sources such as this 1927 book (about the Russian annexation of the province) and this 2019 book (about ethnicity, but summarizing the pre-Russian state, in which Bessarabia was vaguely delimited but generally congruent with Budjak), and "province"+"bessarabia"&pg=PA59&printsec=frontcover this book (which confirms Izmail was part of the province of Bessarabia when the Russians took the province from the Ottomans, before they gave it to Moldovia) that verify at least parts of it. At any rate, though I'm unfamiliar with the history of this area, it appears that it's not "nonsense", but merely a detail of history that is not widely known. Consequently, we should probably keep this redirect, and probably improve the target article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:23, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Bessarabia given the ambiguity of several historical provinces being named "Bessarabia". Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moldavia Province, Ottoman Empire

• Moldavia Province, Ottoman Empire → Moldavia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Moldova Province, Ottoman Empire → Moldavia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bogdan Province, Ottoman Empire → Moldavia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bogdania Province, Ottoman Empire → Moldavia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Boğdan Province, Ottoman Empire → Moldavia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The Principality of Moldavia was never a "province" of the Ottoman Empire. It was never a part of the empire. It always remained a separate country with its own laws and administration under vassalage. These redirects are inaccurate and misleading. Also the "Bogdan/Bogdania/Boğdan" redirects are made up original research. Super Ψ Dro 12:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Moldavia Province and Boğdan Province Referred to as such in several books (on "Moldavia," see [29], [30], [31], etc.) (on "Boğdan," see [32] and [33]). Cannot find references for the others, so delete. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see why should we keep blatantly inaccurate redirects. Moldavia (known in Turkish as Boğdan) was never a formal part of the Ottoman Empire, much less something organized into a province. If anything some parts of Moldavia, fractions, were formally annexed and organized into distinct sanjaks ("provinces") that did not even border each other [34] [35], adding a layer of ambiguity to this issue. That sources with a wide general scope have chosen to use a common word to describe a detail that was clearly not given much attention do not change Moldavia's status in the past. Professional academic sources on the history of Romania will never refer to Moldavia as a "province". Super Ψ Dro 23:37, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are concerned about the inaccuracy, the redirects can be tagged with {{R from incorrect name}}. As it stands, there are indeed sources which refer to this area as a "province" of the Ottoman Empire, so the redirects are plausible search terms. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 03:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This idea (I do not see why should we keep blatantly inaccurate redirects) seems to come up fairly often. The telephone game by which we teach editors how Wikipedia works is not good at this kind of subject. So, because a lot of editors don't know, let me say that the point of a redirect is not to be accurate information, but to take readers to accurate information. An incorrect name can make a perfectly fine redirect. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide–Darwin rail corridor

• Adelaide–Darwin rail corridor → Adelaide–Darwin railway line  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I would like to delete the redirect "Adelaide–Darwin rail corridor" so that I can move the current article, "Adelaide–Darwin railway line" to the name currently occupied by the redirect.

Rationale: There are 5 major rail corridors between Australia's capital cities (as in the map here). For 4 of them, the Wikipedia article uses the word "corridor" (example: Sydney–Brisbane rail corridor). Only the Adelaide–Darwin one uses "line". The action requested would unify the terminology of all five. SCHolar44 (talk) 00:31, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I note that the article was moved from Adelaide–Darwin rail corridor to Tarcoola–Darwin railway line and then to Adelaide–Darwin railway line in 2022; moving it back to the original title would be better handled as a requested move. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You will likely have a faster reply at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests, but I support the technical deletion. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Law of fives

• Law of fives → Discordianism#Law of Fives  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Law of Fives → Discordianism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Law of Fives → Discordianism#Law of Fives  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention at target, I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 22:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a discordian concept (e.g. [36]), so the redirect should go to Discordianism. Furius (talk) 10:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect whose topics are not mentioned at the target do not help the reader at all. Veverve (talk) 11:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Obvious Keep, what is this mass deletion of much of Discordian concepts? Randy Kryn (talk) 11:37, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore relevant section, which can be found here. I'll note that there may be more-recent revisions of this section somewhere in the page history and/or relevant sources to cite (given the section I'm linking didn't have sources at this time); finding said sources/newer revisions will be an exercise left to the editor, given holy hell, the page history for this page is a nightmare. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 00:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This cannot be restored as it is unsourced (WP:BURDEN). Veverve (talk) 10:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This is the correct page in the Principia Discordia (the holy book of this religion), and should serve as a fairly good source for this section, especially given it already claims to (and upon checking, DOES) quote said book. As a note, this took FIVE SECONDS to find, given said book is literally linked to, multiple times, by both this old version of the page AND the current version.

  There's a time and a place to use WP:BURDEN. "I don't feel like taking a five second check to see if I can find a source myself in the most obvious spot(s)" isn't the time nor place. (edit at 12:46, 7 April 2024 (UTC)) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Just like the Bible is most of the time not a RS to talk about Christianity, using this book the way you propose is OR from a primary source and not the use of a secondary RS. Primary sources should often be avoided, and in this case it should. Yes, you can WP:SELFSOURCE, but the relevance of the information (WP:ONUS) is to be decided by secondary sources (do they mention the information? do they say it is an important information, how much do they dedicate to said information?) and not by the presence of redirects. Veverve (talk) 18:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, all right, let's just check the next most obvious spot, being one of the sources we already have, and... Oh hey look, Invented Religions (the book cited multiple times already in these discussions) has a mention of the Law of Fives, too.

  Would be helpful if Google Books had a way to see the full discussion of the topic without buying the book but w/e

  In any case, that brings me back to my main point, there-- it's unhelpful, and actively harmful, to take a broad hatchet and hack away at unsourced parts of an article without first checking the most obvious places to see if you can find a source yourself. Those most obvious places including texts referenced in/quoted by the article without linking to them (which can quickly become sourcing FROM those texts), texts already used as sources elsewhere in the article, and a five-second search on Google Books. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Okmrman (talk) 03:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but restore if the secondary sources mentioned above are used to write about the Law of Fives in the main article. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pronomian

• Pronomian → Antinomianism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pronomianism → Antinomianism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target article does not mention the word “Pronomian” nor explain what the word means. Bwrs (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This seems to be an R from antonym, given the "Anti-" in the target article is getting swapped for "Pro-", with the implication that the views of "Pronomians" are opposite that of "Antinomians". That said, I'd like to point out that R from Antonym as an rcat is one of those rcats that populates a maintenance category, so we can't just tag as Antonym and keep. (Which is odd to me? If we don't have an article on something, but we have an article on its direct opposite, and we can reasonably and competently explain the first thing as "the complete opposite of this second thing", then that seems to be a good place to have a redirect. Why is this rcat populating a maintenance category?) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really know for a fact that pronomianism is the opposite of antinomianism, or do we merely assume so based on the fact that “pro-” is the opposite of “anti-”? Now, if I really wanted to rid Wikipedia of these redirects I can tell you that they were made by somebody who is the subject of an WP:Office action. But the Wikipedia:Office never publishes the reasons for its actions, and I hope that discussing it here might raise the attention of subject matter experts who know what pronomianism actually is. Bwrs (talk) 23:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think maybe we should redirect to Christian views on the Old Covenant. Antinomianism is usually used to mean a particular deviation from the mainstream Christian view (though we do a bad job of defining it in the article), so I don’t think this is an antonym, just another niche view.— JFHutson (talk) 01:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although that might be the most appropriate redirection target, it does not define the term either. Nowhere does the string “pronomian” appear in either the current target or in the new proposed target. This is one of my pet peeves, when a word I do not know redirects to an article that does not define this word. Bwrs (talk) 16:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be fine with deletion as well, as I doubt the redirect could be helpful to anyone.-- JFHutson (talk) 13:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Mountain (logo)

• Dark Mountain (logo) → Paramount Television  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

While the logo might be a mountain, the words "dark" nor "mountain" do not appear anywhere at the target page. We don't have any encyclopedic about a dark mountain logo, which encyclopedic content about a logo seems to be specifically requested through this search term, by including "logo" in the title. With this being tagged as a "related meme without a mention", I'm not too convinced about its plausibility standalone. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 21:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not specific enough, a description of the logo shouldn't be a redirect target if the logo hasn't actually be called like this. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Deco

• Dark Deco → Art Deco#Late Art Deco  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I presume this might have once been [mentioned], but now this concept of Dark Deco is not mentioned at the target. It has minor mentions across Wikipedia in reference to properties such as Batman: The Animated Series (across this and 2 other related pages, Gotham City and Andrea Beaumont), and also at Skullgirls in a quote. As it looks like 75% of all mentions of "Dark Deco" are at Batman pages, perhaps sending this to Batman: The Animated Series is the primary topic? Searching "Dark Deco" externally, 50% of my results are all Batman, with the rest of the topics being neologism hodgepodge across blogs and such. Now that I look into this more, I'm close to believing that "Dark Deco" is a specific Batman-related topic, and one that we cover across multiple Batman pages and basically nowhere else, but I wanted to bring this here as the current target has been fairly longstanding. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 21:45, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dream Catching

• Dream Catching → Meek Mill  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A film that is not mentioned at the target article. I presume it's about the target, but with no mentions to Mill, the connection is unclear? Dreamcatching is a similar redirect that currently points to Dreamcatcher, which this is a variation of. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• First choice - retarget to Dreamcatcher (disambiguation) (as it includes Dream Catcher). Second choice - Delete. Jay 💬 06:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Winged spear

• Winged spear → Bohemian earspoon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Between Corseque, Spetum, and the fact that this redirect is not mentioned in the current target, it's not clear which subject readers are desiring to locate when searching this term. (However, used to be a section at Polearm#Winged spear, a section which was present in 2012, but was removed at some point that year.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit the Bohemian Earspoon is not the most obvious redirect. Winged spears are probably ancestral to the spetum and corseque too. If I were to plump for one, it would probably be spetum. But there is an argument that a separate article or article section on the weapon would ultimately be preferable. Be hard to make it above a start though. Monstrelet (talk) 09:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, makes me wonder if the section I linked which existed over a decade ago should be restored, or even used to overwrite the nominated redirect with an article. Steel1943 (talk) 15:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 17:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Link baiting

• Link baiting → Clickbait  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Deletion, link baiting differs from clickbait to the degree that the redirect is misleading. Link baiting does not have the deceptive nature of clickbait. ^[1] Acalc79 (talk) 14:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suppose I could ask how you're defining "link baiting?" 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

apparently, the difference is the target demographic

clickbait is for general #ContentConsumers™ who love consuming content. for examples, uh, open up youtube and go to incognito mode

link bait is for creators, to try to get them to advertise, sponsor, or otherwise promote your slop. for an example, get offered a raidy shady sponsorship i think

so my pedantic ass would say delete unless a section or article on link bait can be made cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The term is ambiguous. Link bait can mean both "clickbait" as well as "content designed to attract incoming links". We have no content to link to for the latter meaning, so there is nothing to do for now. Paradoctor (talk) 20:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 17:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Japanator.com

• Japanator.com → Destructoid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Japanator → Destructoid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Target article doesn't mention Japanator. Anyone has any idea? Neocorelight (Talk) 01:43, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I actually tried digging around, including the history of the (now community banned) person that created the redirect. Maybe a troll creation? No valid reason can be found, so Delete. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 11:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, not a troll creation. I found this redirect by a link from another article. Neocorelight (Talk) 12:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Japanator should be bundled as well, I think? Not a super simple history. It was a sibling-ish site of Destructoid for quite awhile,[37][38] then was merged into Siliconera [39]. And so was part of Enthusiast Gaming (a possible retarget since it's mentioned there) but then Gamurs acquired some sites from Enthusiast (including Siliconera). So I think retarget to Enthusiast Gaming since it's mentioned there, including the transfer to Gamurs, and most of its system was part of that. Gamurs would be a fine (future) retarget if it's expanded. And open to other ideas if people know more (sadly lots of noise from the, hm, particular era that impacted gaming sites). (Pinging Neocorelight and Dennis Brown.) Skynxnex (talk) 16:43, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Skynxnex Please do the bundling. I don't know how to. Neocorelight (Talk) 22:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Neocorelight added (I think, oddly this is something I haven't done a ton of). Skynxnex (talk) 22:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you. Neocorelight (Talk) 22:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Gamurs would be an ideal target, but if no one's gonna write a mention of Japanator then I'm fine with retargeting to Enthusiast Gaming. Neocorelight (Talk) 22:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think redirecting it to an article with an unsourced single line mention is a good idea. For the redirect to stay, somewhere there needs to be a cite at least demonstrating it existed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 04:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added one. Neocorelight (Talk) 06:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 17:54, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the way to Aberystwyth

• Is this the way to Aberystwyth → (Is This the Way to) Amarillo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. Youtube suggests it's a parody version of the song, but it's not mentioned here, and doesn't look to be widely covered, and thus an implausible search term in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There was no need to consult me about this and I don't see why you didn't tag Is This the Way to Aberystwyth. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

52nd International Film Festival Rotterdam

• 52nd International Film Festival Rotterdam → 51st International Film Festival Rotterdam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Misleading redirect, actually pointing to the 51st edition of the festival. Per WP:REDLINK a redlink would be more useful, as it would encourage editors to create the page, and not giving them the impression the page already exists. Cavarrone 16:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: as misleading, and also to encourage creation of an actual article about the 52th event. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian concession in Sarandë

• Romanian concession in Sarandë → Romanian Institute in Albania  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Draft:Romanian concession in Sarandë → Romanian Institute in Albania  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Romanian Institute in Albania was originally created under this title. The author, blocked since 2019, appears to have misread the sources he used. Albania granted a Romanian historian property in Sarandë and he established an institute on it and granted half of the land to the Romanian state, but this does not mean a part of Sarandë stopped being a sovereign part of Albania to become part of Romania. The "concession" thing is original research. No sources talk about this using the word "concession" [40]. This is ultimately a hoax. Draft:Romanian concession in Sarandë should be deleted too. Super Ψ Dro 13:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also bundled Draft:Romanian concession in Sarandë and notified of this discussion at the target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bessel potential space

• Bessel potential space → Bessel potential  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Sobolev space#Bessel potential spaces seems like a more precise target (though the articles should also ideally link to each other). 1234qwer1234qwer4 12:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balon D´Or

• Balon D´Or → Ballon d'Or  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer. Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 10:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balon de Oro

• Balon de Oro → Ballon d'Or  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer. Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 10:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:RLANG. I think this is probably a rendering of the Spanish name for this trophy, Balón de Oro, without the diacritic. Since this award has no particular affinity to Spanish, I see no reason to keep. (Note that the version with the diacritic does not exist). - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: no specific ties to Spanish (as it's a French magazine award), so Spanish name redirect not needed here. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

European footballer of the year

• European footballer of the year → Ballon d'Or  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer. Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 10:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - stats show use, WP:RFD#K5. The Ballon d'Or is an award for European footballer of the year, so it's at least valid unless there are other awards for the same thing (which I suspect there are but don't know where to look at the moment). Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Given as an alternative name in the lead. Tag as {{R from incorrect capitalization}}. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yuno Miles

• Yuno Miles → Comedy hip hop#History and examples  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

PROD'ed but redirects are ineligible for that process. The original PROD statement was: Redirects to an article that doesn't mention Miles. Appears reasonable to me, this person doesn't seem notable enough to be mentioned in the target article as far as I can tell and I don't immediately see a good alternative target. Pinging original nominator: @Frankoceanreal. Tollens (talk) 07:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appomatox coart house surrender

• Appomatox coart house surrender → Battle of Appomattox Court House#Surrender  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The double misspelling (both Appomattox and Court) with the miscapitalization on top makes this highly unlikely to be useful. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 07:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - unlikely misspelling. Odd that this has been around for 12 years but it doesn't seem to be an {{R from move}} or anything else that we'd usually keep for an odd reason. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bounding Into Comics

• Bounding Into Comics → All3Media#Companies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The two seem unrelated. --62.166.252.25 (talk) 06:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Texas–Permian Basin Falcons football coach navbox

• Template:Texas–Permian Basin Falcons football coach navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox only contains two blue links, not enough to warrant the existence of this template for navigation purposes. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 08:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Not sure of / if there's a policy specific on this(?), but generally it seems fine to me to have navboxes when there's multiple links, especially of this type; coach navboxes like this are very useful IMO, both to editors and I'd think those who want to know more about the coaching history of their programs (as its often the only place to find it). NENAN is an essay. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:17, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify/userify. This template has two blue links and no red links in its body now, but represents "a well-defined and complete set of data" per Wikipedia:Navigation template, and is a member of a structured and long-standing class of templates. More linked articles will likely be created in the future. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per BeanieFan11's comments. Or Delete per Jweiss11's comment and has a counterpart in userspace already. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 16:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Subst or userfy presumably there will be more coaches at some point and it doesn't need to be removed from the articles it's already in. Pinguinn 🐧 22:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on subst/userfy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UMass Boston Beacons football coach navbox

• Template:UMass Boston Beacons football coach navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox only contains two blue links, not enough to warrant the existence of this template for navigation purposes. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 08:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Not sure of / if there's a policy specific on this(?), but generally it seems fine to me to have navboxes when there's multiple links, especially of this type; coach navboxes like this are very useful IMO, both to editors and I'd think those who want to know more about the coaching history of their programs (as its often the only place to find it). NENAN is an essay. Not to mention it is almost certain there could be more bluelinks made if the redlinks are created. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:17, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This template has two blue links in its body, represents "a well-defined and complete set of data" per Wikipedia:Navigation template, and is a member of a structured and long-standing class of templates. At the very least, this template should be draftified/userfied. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. per Jweiss11 and BeanieFan11's comments. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Subst or userfy there will be more coaches in the future to justify this template. Until then it doesn't need to be removed from the articles it is in. Pinguinn 🐧 23:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on subst/userfy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Averett Cougars football coach navbox

• Template:Averett Cougars football coach navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox only contains two blue links, not enough to warrant the existence of this template for navigation purposes. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 08:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Not sure of / if there's a policy specific on this(?), but generally it seems fine to me to have navboxes when there's multiple links, especially of this type; coach navboxes like this are very useful IMO, both to editors and I'd think those who want to know more about the coaching history of their programs (as its often the only place to find it). NENAN is an essay. Not to mention it is almost certain there could be more bluelinks made if the redlinks are created. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:17, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This template has two blue links in its body, represents "a well-defined and complete set of data" per Wikipedia:Navigation template, and is a member of a structured and long-standing class of templates. At the very least, this template should be draftified/userfied. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. per Jweiss11 and BeanieFan11's comments. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 16:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Subst or userfy there will be more coaches in the future to justify this template. Until then it doesn't need to be removed from the articles it is in. Pinguinn 🐧 23:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on subst/userfy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Castleton Spartans football coach navbox

• Template:Castleton Spartans football coach navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox only contains two blue links, not enough to warrant the existence of this template for navigation purposes. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:54, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 08:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Not sure of / if there's a policy specific on this(?), but generally it seems fine to me to have navboxes when there's multiple links, especially of this type; coach navboxes like this are very useful IMO, both to editors and I'd think those who want to know more about the coaching history of their programs (as its often the only place to find it). NENAN is an essay. Not to mention it is almost certain there could be more bluelinks made if the redlinks are created. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:17, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This template has two blue links in its body, represents "a well-defined and complete set of data" per Wikipedia:Navigation template, and is a member of a structured and long-standing class of templates. At the very least, this template should be draftified/userfied. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. per Jweiss11 and BeanieFan11's comments. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 16:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Subst or userfy there will be more coaches in the future to justify this template. Until then it doesn't need to be removed from the articles it is in. Pinguinn 🐧 23:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on subst or userfy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:54, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Concordia Cardinals football coach navbox

• Template:Concordia Cardinals football coach navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox only contains two blue links, not enough to warrant the existence of this template for navigation purposes. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 08:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Not sure of / if there's a policy specific on this(?), but generally it seems fine to me to have navboxes when there's multiple links, especially of this type; coach navboxes like this are very useful IMO, both to editors and I'd think those who want to know more about the coaching history of their programs (as its often the only place to find it). NENAN is an essay. Not to mention it is almost certain there could be more bluelinks made if the redlinks are created. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:47, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:17, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This template has two blue links in its body, represents "a well-defined and complete set of data" per Wikipedia:Navigation template, and is a member of a structured and long-standing class of templates. At the very least, this template should be draftified/userfied. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The navbox fails #3, #4, and #5 of the criteria listed at WP:NAVBOX. There is no article for the subject of this navbox (List of Concordia Cardinals football coaches) and there probably shouldn't be one. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. per Jweiss11 and BeanieFan11's comments. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 16:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Subst or userfy there will be more coaches in the future to justify this template. Until then it doesn't need to be removed from the articles it is in. Pinguinn 🐧 23:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts on subst or userfying?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Date.IsLeapYear

• Template:Date.IsLeapYear (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or documentation. Created in 2020. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Forifexist

• Template:Forifexist (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or documentation. Created in 2014. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Yucatan Radio/doc and similar

• Template:Yucatan Radio/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Coahuila Radio/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Central Michigan Radio/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Bend Radio/doc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused /doc subpage replaced with more comprehensive shared documentation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]