Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion

WikiProject iconDeletion (defunct)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Deletion, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.


AFD request: Webaroo

This web browser article has zero references to establish notability. After searching, found a few social media and Wikipedia-copied websites, but no independent, comprehensive, in-depth coverage. Article was created on 23 February 2009. PROD on March 21, 2009, then de-prod on March 22, 2009. First AfD was March 24, 2009, then removed the same day. Asking for help here to do the second Afd. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 03:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JoeNMLC:  Done. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Webaroo (2nd nomination). CycloneYoris talk! 08:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFD request: Shock (troupe)

This article needs to be nominated for deletion. It cites no sources (despite being tagged for a decade now), and the subject doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Shock were a short-lived British dance troupe from the early 80s, but were never famous in their own right. They were known only by association. They released two singles, neither of which charted. Their former members are not prominent or widely known beyond this troupe.2A0A:EF40:1267:7101:1C9B:C983:95B0:AF56 (talk) 18:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shock (troupe). CycloneYoris talk! 08:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFD request: Rainbow Minute

Jedwardchapman made exactly two edits: the creation of this article in 2009, and a minor edit to it the following year. Outside of being a relatively short article with very few sources, the subject is not very well known outside of Richmond, Virginia. Not to mention, the article comes off more as a promotion for Diversity Richmond rather than an informative piece on the radio show. 100.7.34.111 (talk) 18:56, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rainbow Minute. CycloneYoris talk! 08:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article had sources for citations, but only 60% of the article has citations, which means that 40% of the article has no citations. This article also fails WP:GNG for a stand-alone list. 14.203.182.49 (talk) 09:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The notice "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for stand-alone lists." on that article has been there since May 2017. And nothing has changed for it to meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for stand-alone lists. 14.203.182.49 (talk) 09:35, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of preserved Southern Pacific Railroad rolling stock. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFD Request: Living Daylights

Stub article that fails Wikipedia:Notability, and has 0 references whatsoever, a Google search doesn't return any independent and reliable sources, but only a couple Amazon links and Facebook pages 108.49.72.125 (talk) 16:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given that there has not been any actual article body contact editing in seven years, this page could likely be deleted using the simpler WP:PROD procedure. I briefly placed a PROD on it myself, but reconsidered as the existence an All Things Considered piece on the band gets them at least partway to notability, and a newspaper search finds things like this, this, this, and this, to pick a few, suggesting the page may be suorceable.. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:55, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFD request: Synthoid

Just look at this article. 2605:B40:13E7:F600:40FE:7B6D:17E8:D289 (talk) 23:50, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you subsequently redirected the page and that has not been reverted, the request for an AfD seems moot. --RL0919 (talk) 17:02, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bot to ping AfD (nth nomination) to previous AfD participants?

I have noticed a recent AfD on a new instance of a previously-deleted article rattling around the relist circuit. Seeing this makes me suggest a potential Bot task:

For each AfD (nth nomination) which commences, retrieve the Usernames of all participants in the previous AfD(s), and append a neutrally-worded Pinging UserX, UserY, etc. who participated in a previous AfD discussion line to the new AfD.

If these participants are pinged to reconsider whether their previous keep/delete opinions remain relevant, this could improve participation and resolution of the new AfD. AllyD (talk) 14:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A good idea which the nominators should actually be doing as part of the process. If a bot "forces" them to notify participants of previous AfD's of the same article, all the better. I am not a bot creator so have no idea of how easy or difficult programming a bot would be for this task, just commenting on your idea. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting idea, and it is supported by WP:APPNOTE (Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics)). If there're no objections here we can bring it to WP:BOTREQ and get some technical input on feasibility. Liu1126 (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I am of the opinion that what a new AfD needs most, if a previous one hadn't settled the question, is participation by previously uninvolved contributors, able to put a new perspective on things. Pinging previous participants (particularly those not sufficiently interested in a topic to have it watchlisted) may end up looking like an invitation to merely repeat what they said before. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:55, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea. Jclemens (talk) 01:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we do something like this, let's take care not ping vanished/blocked editors. BD2412 T 02:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request to Complete an AFD nomination.

Hello, Please could someone nominate a page for deletion for me? I can't create the subpage as an IP.

The page in question is Sweble.

My nomination statement is as follows:

I am really struggling to see how this wikitext parser is notable. The page has been tagged as being of questionable notability and using primary sources since 2011, so I think it's about time it went to AFD.

There doesn't seem to be a single source in the article that demonstrates third party coverage of this software. Citations 1, 2 and 3 are links to the software's own website. Citation 4 is an announcement that the authors of the software will be presenting it at a conference. Citations 5, 7, 10 and 11 are papers written by the authors of Sweble. Citation 6 is a dead link to what seems to have been an open source community page? Citations 8 and 9 are pages on the mediawiki wiki, unusable as sources.

A few google searches failed to turn up anything usable, mostly software repositories and the papers written by the software's authors. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:01, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sweble. Liu1126 (talk) 12:22, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The event does not have long-lasting effects whatsoever and has no notability. It is only covered by local media and there has been no lasting coverage from any international media. It was not a significant event, neither in civilian nor military aviation. As such I would like someone to nominate this page for deletion. Thank you so much. PaPa PaPaRoony (talk) 09:07, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at Wikipedia:Twinkle? You can easily create it yourself using Twinkle Garuda3 (talk) 11:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFP request :

I think there are 2 issues with this article, but I'm not sure of the procedure to follow so I prefer to post there : {1} It's a new compagny with no effective product or service: testing is expected to begin in 2026, before commercial service in 2028. The use of nearly only the futur tense or verbs with conditionnal or future meaning as ("would", "planned", "is expected"...) shows that. {2} It seems that the subject has no significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent secondary sources. International Railway Journal is a media of limited interest (trade magazine for railway industry) and the content seems more promotional than informative. Quechoisir is a French media with a national audience but the mention is anecdotical. La Tribune is a French economic media but the coverage is not significant. 92.162.76.6 (talk) 21:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have forgotten to include the name of the article in question. Having that would make matters easier to address. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 00:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm deeply sorry! The article is called Kevin Speed.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Speed 2A01:CB06:9010:85CA:902D:36F8:BBC6:525B (talk) 18:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion&oldid=1215882684"