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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 01:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

41, el hombre perfecto[edit]

41, el hombre perfecto (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 indication of significant coverage showing notability. Sources provided mention the film only briefly and provide no in-depth critical coverage. Nothing located on a search. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:12, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Mexico. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:12, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:57, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ✗plicit 02:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Samba Nova (AI)[edit]

Samba Nova (AI) (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 about a company that lacks appropriate sourcing to meet the relevant guideline, WP:NCORP. The sources aren't independent in WP:ORGIND sense, as they are mostly fundraising announcemnets that provide no independent "opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject." ~Styyx^Talk? 23:20, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United States of America. ~Styyx^Talk? 23:20, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: While this article content looks typical for start-up coverage (funding rounds, product proposition), the December 2020 article by Sally Ward-Foxton and the April 2021 Nicole Hemsoth article that I added as a reference are more substantial and could contribute to WP:NCORP. AllyD (talk) 16:27, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:57, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I don't see anything that convinces me this passes WP:NCORP, the best is this more product-related article. Other than that, everything just seems to be about funding rounds. Jacona (talk) 00:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:44, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Vampire Academy#Main characters. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:52, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of Vampire Academy characters[edit]

List of Vampire Academy characters (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)

Another long list of in-universe, unsourced cruft. Either delete it or cut it down and merge. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 22:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy, Television, and Lists. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 22:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I don't see that the nominator has tried to trim, merge, or redirect, all of which are ATDs. As such, there's really nothing to do here that has proven to be un-fixable by regular editing. It's arguable that this should be closed per SK#1, since "List of X characters" where X is a clearly notable fictional franchise obviously has a redirect target. Jclemens (talk) 23:14, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The reason is simple: I've been down this road before. I've tried to do the ATD's for other franchises with character listicles, only to have my efforts reverted by overzealous inclusionists who can't bear to see a single word of their lovingly detailed summaries altered. AfD has proven to be the only way to get this work done w/ proper community involvement. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Speedy Keep on the basis of nominator admitting zero effort to resolve perceived difficulties without resorting to deletion. Jclemens (talk) 23:52, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  And when I do make the effort, people scream at me for "acting unilaterally" and "not seeking consensus," so what am I supposed to do exactly? Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 05:17, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If an edit you make is reverted (and this includes you making a redirect or requesting a speedy deletion or prod), you may find it better to go to the talk page and start a discussion to try to get consensus for what you are doing. See WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Or, of course, you could raise the matter in advance on the talk page if you anticipate opposition. Thincat (talk) 15:04, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Jclemens. Don't see a reason for deletion. Agletarang (talk) 16:35, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• @Jclemens also mentioned the main Vampire Academy article as a redirect target. Since that article already has a character list, any thoughts on redirecting this article over there? Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 17:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect to the main article. Vampire Academy#Main characters and Bloodlines (book series)#Characters seem to provide sufficient overview of the main characters relative to the weight required to understand the context of the articles. There are no sources showing the grouping establishes notability to meet GNG or LISTN. This is not a valid offshoot article because it has not been shown that the main articles are overburdened by necessary contextual plot information. Most of what is here is irrelevant for the purposes of a general encyclopedia, so it can be tossed without any issue. ATD concerns seem moot when there is no relevant sourced content to salvage. TTN (talk) 12:48, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 14:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. As written, it's pure plot summary fancruft. It's time to start cleaning that part of the stable too. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 19:18, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect As WP:ATD. Pure plotcruft and FANDOM material that is unsuitable as an article unless RS are added as well. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see consensus here but the Keep votes aren't grounded in policy-based reasons and seem like a reaction to the suggestion of deletion. Any more support for redirecting this article to Vampire Academy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect, since there is an obvious appropriate place to redirect to. De Guerre (talk) 08:13, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Vampire Academy#Main characters - While character lists can be valid spinout articles on a piece of fiction, that is not an automatic guarantee that there should be one. In this case, a completely unsourced list of overly detailed plot information is not an appropriate spinout, and should be Redirected back to the main article. Rorshacma (talk) 15:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect as this is not a valid spinout, as it is missing WP:NOTABILITY in the form of WP:SIGCOV in reliable independent sources. Jontesta (talk) 04:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment List of X characters derive notability from the fictional franchise; Rorscacma is correct. However, the second part of the argument presumes that there are no sources for any of the characters and that no clean-up could fix it. In fact, there is simply no evidence either has been attempted. Jclemens (talk) 07:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  There's more to it than just notability. Per WP:WAF, fictional subjects should be covered in terms of their real-world cultural impact and RS must be found w/ an eye towards showcasing same. This is what separates WP from the countless fan wikis which proliferate online.

  Along that same line, why is everyone is so quick to point out all the ways they think an article could be improved, but no one actually does it? I swear, AfD causes WP:BEBOLD to go right out the window. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 22:54, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect As per Piotr. MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Sandstein 06:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keitaro Okubo[edit]

Keitaro Okubo (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, WP:NGYMNASTICS and WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Japan. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the article doesn’t fail WP:NGYMNASTICS as Okubo meets the criteria Won a senior individual medal at an elite international competition, particularly a World Cup silver. WP:GNG is also met as the FIG link describes the gymnast’s information directly & in details, & FIG is a reliable source & independent of the gymnast himself. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 18:25, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Does not meet GNG with the sources in the article. Those are not significant coverage because they are one sentence each about him. Significant coverage is usually 2-3 paragraphs that go in depth about the subject. May meet the SNG though. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• There are 3 links, not 2. The another one is all about him. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 11:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The article fails WP:GNG. Also, I agree that the sources in the article do not provide significant coverage on the subject. Fats40boy11 (talk) 11:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:53, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:NGYMNASTICS. LibStar (talk) 04:30, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. I'm surprised but the consensus here is that this individual's coverage meets WP:NBASIC Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mandy Jiroux[edit]

Mandy Jiroux (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)

Nominating for deletion as all but none of these sources are reliable and don't show sustained notability. The sources that do qualify as reliable (The Hollywood Reporter) are about a lawsuit for an un-notable song and Wired source placed emphasis on Miley Cyrus. Trillfendi (talk) 19:41, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Arizona. Shellwood (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but trim. Borderline but appears to barely qualify for notability. Andrevan@ 19:50, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I think there is plenty of coverage. Also per WP:BASIC "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." Zeddedm (talk) 21:12, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The sources are unreliable though… (AXS link doesn’t work, IMDb not reliable, “livingly.com” not reliable, Refinery29 is a blog, “blogtalkradio.com” not reliable and a dead link, “lifestyle.one” redirects to heatworld which is not reliable, “celebuzz.com” not reliable and also a dead link, J-14 is a gossip magazine for children and the link is dead, jsonline [Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel] simply had her name on a setlist with about 300 or 400 other names, “tapsongz.com” not reliable, “thatdrop.com” not reliable, “housem.nl” not reliable, “powerhouse.nl” link is unresponsive), and even if you take the 3 sources that qualify as notable, you can’t have an article with 3 sources and maybe 4 or 5 sentences (if that) actually about the subject. Trillfendi (talk) 22:45, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect There's plenty of coverage, but I'd want to see more independent secondary sources as per WP:SOURCE Majority of reliable notability that I see comes from Miley Cyrus--Littehammy (talk) 23:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous AFD resulted in this article becoming a redirect but it seems like there is more support for Keeping it and improving it on the 2nd AFD. More opinions?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - Don't know how much this helps, but Jiroux has some more accomplishments since her first AfD way back in 2008. Her work in choreography and music, such as it is, got some notice from relatively reliable sources (largely because of her Miley connection) as currently cited in the article. There is probably enough for a short stub article here, but fan trivia and social media-dependent sources need to be whacked. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - In addition to the sources in the article I was able to find some significant coverage this Miley Cyrus autobiography, this discussing their podcast, this one discussing their friendship, this one going into a good bit of depth. Here is a book mention that is independent of Cyrus as well. I did try to search Newspapers.com and there were a lot of trivial mentions, mostly about a dance routine at some awards show and another where she had to release a statement about a fake rumor of Cyrus's death, but as far as newspaper coverage I couldn't find anything. Still, given the sources in the article (and yes I realize that half of them are absolute junk, I'm not including those) with the book references, I do think the article's subject meets the notability guidelines. It's not the strongest claim to notability and I feel like maybe it's borderline with WP:GNG, but it does meet WP:BASIC's criteria: If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. Even if the sources aren't the most in-depth pieces, they certainly aren't trivial mentions so WP:BASIC would support keeping this article. - Aoidh (talk) 13:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ✗plicit 11:37, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tyler Denk[edit]

Tyler Denk (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 reality television contestant. Bgsu98 (talk) 22:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Ohio. Bgsu98 (talk) 22:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two previous AFD discussions ended in "Keep" decisions but they were both 15 years ago. I'd like to see a current assessment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:50, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t imagine what about that article said “Keep me”… 🤷‍♂️ Bgsu98 (talk) 03:07, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a stub and information on Tyler Denk is hard to come by as he is not active on social media to my knowledge.

He is a recovered drug addict and a professional model who has appeared on CSI Miami and did an interview on Live with Kelly and Ryan, but other than that, information is hard to come by. Obviously, he is notable for winning a popular Reality Show, but does that truly merit a Wikipedia Page? Daybreak87 (talk) 03:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It was kept before because editors saw some potential in the subject but the time has proven that there is not enough coverage. Azuredivay (talk) 07:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Coverage is not sufficient to meet WP:NBIO. MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was draftify. ✗plicit 12:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nellikathuruthi Kazhakam[edit]

Nellikathuruthi Kazhakam (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)

Quite why I didn't go G1 with this, I don't know. Article is almost entirely indecipherable. "Nellikathuruthy Kazhakam is an important Kazhakam" - the word Kazhakham is linked to a 1996 film of that name. Where Nellikathuruthy Kazhakam is - and quite what it is, is not defined. It's certainly not defined in the sources presented, none of which actually mention Nellikathuruthy Kazhakam - the article is a neat little bit of OR/SYNTH - presented in such convoluted and gramatically poor English that it's hard to sort out quite what is happening here: "Problems that could not be solved in other poles would then reach this pocket" is a typical example. It's borderline gibberish, fails WP:GNG and needs to go to perhaps make way, one day, for an article about a well defined thing that is written well enough and sourced well enough to let the casual reader know quite what thing it is about. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:54, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, India, and Kerala. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:54, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ummmmm……. Wow! What on earth is this about? Mccapra (talk) 17:39, 23 July 2022 (UTC) about?[reply]

• Comment - One of the refs ([1]) clarify that a kazhakham is a temple organization. --Soman (talk) 02:04, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:48, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify There may be a notable topic in here but at the moment this is little more than word salad and I can’t see how collaborative editing could improve it in its current state. The creator needs to do some work to give everyone else a basic starting point for contributing. Mccapra (talk) 04:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify I will go with Mccapra. Article needs more work and Draftify is the good option. BBSTOP (talk) 05:06, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Mylo Xyloto. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Up with the Birds[edit]

Up with the Birds (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)

Similar to its B-side U.F.O., the song is a fairly unremarkable release in terms of independent significant coverage, there doesn't seem to be any. Information could be (and is already contained) at parent album page. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 21:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Mylo Xyloto - song does not appear to have independent notability from the album, which is certainly notable. Even in album reviews, mentions of the song are mostly trivial and there is not other coverage that would meet WP:GNG. —Ganesha811 (talk) 15:29, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:57, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Le Vaisseau[edit]

Le Vaisseau (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 has been tagged with the {{unreferenced}} template since June 2008. I was unable to find any sources via the standard search options that were relevant to this centre.

The sole English language source is for an unrelated building with the same name in Issy-les-Moulineaux. Sideswipe9th (talk) 20:12, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries and France. Sideswipe9th (talk) 20:12, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note to closer If this article is deleted, a redirect to this article also exists at The vaisseau. Sideswipe9th (talk) 20:13, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I’ve done a thorough search and added one ref. There’s a second news item but it’s paywalled. Apart from that there is nothing except the Vaisseau site itself and tourist “things to do in Strasbourg” sites so I’m not seeing any basis for notability. Mccapra (talk) 05:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 16:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Rapid[edit]

Johnny Rapid (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)

2 independent sources: both from 2015-16, and both about specific instances of domestic abuse, not the subject's career. Plus the "$2 mill to fuck Justin Bieber" story which has had no lasting coverage. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 18:56, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Entertainment. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 18:56, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:58, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Shellwood (talk) 19:01, 30 July 2022 (UTC) [reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:56, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Kbabej. Not fantastic sources, but enough for GNG. Thanks; I apparently can't find good sources on pornography. Ovinus (talk) 16:14, 12 August 2022 (UTC) Delete – No indication of significant coverage. Also noting that there are some BLP problems with the article, e.g. something about attempted sex with a minor sourced to Gay Star News. I've removed this last bit. Ovinus (talk) 20:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. His domestic incidents have been covered by PinkNews, a green-level RS on WP:RSP (here). Queerty covered a marketing stunt where he offered Justin Bieber $2m to film with him (here). Bieber responded to the offer (here). Rapid then went on to make a Justin Bieber porn parody (here). Rapid's announcement he was retiring from porn was covered by The Gay UK, where he's called "prolific" (here). In the first ever Pornhub awards, Rapid was awarded "Top Gay Group Performer" (here). He is one of Men.com's most searched names (here). In Supersex: Sexuality, Fantasy, and the Superhero, Anna Peppard covers Rapid four times (snippets here). Observatoriog calls him "one of the most beloved personalities in the world of international gay porn" (here). --Kbabej (talk) 10:02, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Already discussed here: I keep for the same reasons. Keckel (talk) 11:49, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to 2022 ASEAN Para Games. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Powerlifting at the 2022 ASEAN Para Games[edit]

Powerlifting at the 2022 ASEAN Para 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)

Powerlifting at the 2022 ASEAN Para Games

This article has no references. It also refers to a future event (as stated in the parent article) and does not give enough details to be encyclopedic, as well as being too soon for a future event. The lede sentence incorrectly uses the past tense. This article has no encyclopedic content. It does not belong in article space. Not moving to draft space because author moved another similar article back into article space from draft space, so AFD seems the necessary course. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, and Indonesia. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to 2022 ASEAN Para Games. It can be re-created if enough information can be found after the games. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 18:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 01:22, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kristen Bjorn[edit]

Kristen Bjorn (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 one good source here apparently consists of a series of interviews with the subject, which is not reliable or independent. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 17:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Entertainment. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 17:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:39, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:09, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 23:44, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Colton Ford[edit]

Colton Ford (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)

Lacks significant coverage 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 17:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 17:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Bands and musicians. Shellwood (talk) 17:57, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. Shellwood (talk) 17:58, 30 July 2022 (UTC) [reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:41, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:55, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Ford was the subject of the documentary film Naked Fame, which was reviewed by the Los Angeles Times and the New York Post (see film's page for reviews). After completing the documentary, The Advocate did a piece on him here. He also starred in the television show The Lair. His song "The Way You Love Me" was reviewed by Billboard here. His album Tug of War was reviewed by Billboard here. Instinct did a profile here. The Albuquerque Journal covered him performing here. His song "Stay" was reviewed by Instinct here, and the Gay Entertainment Directory here. His song "Unity" was covered by OutClique here. SFGN did a profile on him here. Metro Weekly covered him here. The list continues, but you get the idea. --Kbabej (talk) 09:29, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per the coverage identified above that shows significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such as Billboard, Albuquerque Journal, Metro Weekly, The Advocate and others so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:33, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to The Order of the Stick. I see a consensus that this article should not be left as is. In terms of the outcome, merges have both a numerical and a policy-based advantage. -- Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 17:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of The Order of the Stick characters[edit]

List of The Order of the Stick characters (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 does not appear that there is enough independent coverage of the characters themselves to provide notability for a separate article on the characters. The main article on the comic can provide coverage of the key characters. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:11, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation, Webcomics, and Internet. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:11, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Selectively merge to The Order of the Stick. The lead of this article appears to be reasonably well-sourced (although a bit more reliant on primary sources than I'd like). The only secondary source cited in the entire rest of the article is this, which appears to be an unreliable blog. I found some sources providing brief descriptions of the characters, such as this from Screen Rant, but that only provides a level of detail comparable to what's already at The Order of the Stick#Characters, leaving this article as the usual mass of fancruft in need of a prune. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:53, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Transwiki to Wikibooks, as there appears to be a lack of reference support for this. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:34, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect – Pretty much all sources are primary, except for a short Comics Alliance citation. I don't think there's really anything to merge here that isn't already in the main article. It even already has an extensive character listing there. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - a redirect seems unnecessary, as the only incoming links to this page are from the proposed target, a list of lists, and 8 DAB pages. The main page already contains a list of characters, so the major ones are covered. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:58, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's also a matter of external links. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 02:09, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is there a tool that shows those? Because a google search for the page's url turned up very little non-Wikipedia content. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:07, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete same reasoning as Maplestrip. Hekerui (talk) 09:23, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge or redirect to The Order of the Stick per the above per WP:PRESERVE and WP:ATD. BOZ (talk) 12:49, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect to The_Order_of_the_Stick#Characters. I am mildly surprised this doesn't meet WP:NLIST, IMHO it's a pretty popular webcomic. But as usual, this is WP:FANCRUFT and WP:ALLPLOT, or mostly. Some content can and should be used to enhance the main article. Don't hardelete, WP:SOFTDELETE (since, I stress, fragments of this can be used to enhance the main article). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and add "independent coverage of the characters", which is not hard to find. For example this review concentrates on characters Mithoron (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe lesser sources, but Order Of The Stick: Degrees Of Good And Evil analyses characters and this review talks about their versions in The Order of the Stick Adventure Game: The Dungeon of Dorukan Mithoron (talk) 16:33, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say that review concentrates on the characters. It contains a brief list of them in one paragraph, and then another paragraph with one to two sentences of coverage each on the main hero and the main villain. The fist "lesser source" does not appear to be a reliable source, and the second one seems to be little more than a bunch of passing mentions. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking back at this a day later, I do see what you mean about the review providing significant coverage of the characters. Personally I still feel a merge is warranted unless enough secondary sources can be found to go into more detail than already exists or would belong The Order of the Stick#Characters without relying on primary sources, whereas all that could be sourced from the above review is a sentence analogous to the last paragraph in the lead, and maybe one or two more sentences in the Roy and Xykon sections. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is plenty of independent coverage of the characters on the Web. See discussion of Roy here. https://thecinnamonroll.co/2014/03/20/webcomic-review-the-order-of-the-stick/

Also, I'd be interested to know how much independent coverage of characters in many TV shows.

Consider this article, which has chalked up 102 edits since 2007, and which contains 0 citations: List of Felicity characters RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 09:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a persuasive argument at AfD. Feel free to start Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Felicity characters * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the sources listed in this AfD meeting GNG per my appraisal. A merge isn't going to be a horrible outcome either, but I don't think policy requires it be enforced as an AfD outcome. Jclemens (talk) 02:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Mithoron and Jclemens, and per WP:PRESERVE and WP:ATD. BOZ (talk) 07:01, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  (1) You !voted twice (2) WP:ATD is inapplicable here since the discussion is largely between merging, which is already an ATD, and keeping at this point (3) WP:PRESERVE is inapplicable here since merging is one of the list of actions to consider instead of deleting there. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 08:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Selectively merge per Pppery and others. I would expand the paragraphs at the main article on the Order themselves, especially, and add in some of the longer-running or more pivotal supporting characters such as Celia. But I don't believe the near-exhaustive coverage given them here can be justified. —VeryRarelyStable 11:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was merge to The Legend of the Legendary Heroes#Story. It looks like the merger was begun before this official AFD closure but additional work and editor review may still be called for. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of The Legend of the Legendary Heroes characters[edit]

List of The Legend of the Legendary Heroes characters (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)

Yet another long list of in-universe plotcruft with no real world notability outside of the fandom. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 23:10, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Anime and manga, and Japan. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 23:10, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to The_Legend_of_the_Legendary_Heroes#Story, a section that's way too short and can use more content, even if it's plot summary. Sadly, there is no evidence that NLIST or GNG is met for the separate list of characters. Btw, I did enjoy that show. Just saying :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:05, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, or Merge to The_Legend_of_the_Legendary_Heroes#Story per Piotrus. I think there is merit in keeping the list around as a separate page, since there's a lot of characters and listing them all on the main page would be potentially cumbersome, but if not I am not opposed to merging. However, it needs to be greatly condensed and copyedited in either case. Joyce-stick (talk) 10:01, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  What about limiting the merge to just the main characters? That's what I did on an AfD for another anime w/ a large cast. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 18:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  That sounds reasonable. I'm not familiar with the source, but even just skimming the list there do seem to be a lot of characters who don't play all that big of a role in the narrative, so they seem able to be safely omitted.

  In the case that we opt for a merge, however, I'd stress that it may be a decent idea to consider the potential for resurrecting the list in the future if anyone can find sufficient sourcing to better prove notability (it's entirely possible there's non-English sources that have been overlooked). Joyce-stick (talk) 07:31, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:03, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge the core characters to The_Legend_of_the_Legendary_Heroes#Story. There is nothing indicating this much depth is necessary for a general encyclopedic overview of the topic, and there are no sources showing independent notability for the grouping as a whole. TTN (talk) 19:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per Piotrus. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 20:17, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or Merge to The_Legend_of_the_Legendary_Heroes#Story, unlike the other character list AfD's, the depth seems quite reasonable at first glance. If a merger can be done that preserves content for the main & important secondary characters then merge it, otherwise if it makes the main article too long then keep per WP:SIZESPLIT. I don't watch this series so I can't make an determination either way. Jumpytoo Talk 03:33, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per WP:CONSENSUS. This list does not meet the WP:GNG because it doesn't have WP:SIGCOV in reliable independent sources. But an editor may summarize some of it for the plot section at the main article. Jontesta (talk) 04:48, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I have added cut-down versions of the Main Characters to the main article. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 23:03, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Would you confirm that you edited that down from Special:PermanentLink/1102878752#Main characters? Please do not merge or copy during the AfD per WP:Guide to deletion#You may edit the article during the discussion, point 5 (how-to guide, shortcut WP:EDITATAFD). Also, please follow WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Proper attribution (guideline, shortcut WP:PATT). Flatscan (talk) 04:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I didn't make any changes to the article under AfD, but I did copy/paste some of it over to the main article, since the idea of a merge has been brought up. Feel free to revert if that's not within policy. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 06:10, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sara Hauman[edit]

Sara Hauman (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 reality television contestant. Bgsu98 (talk) 23:09, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Television, and California. Bgsu98 (talk) 23:09, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nomination. She is notable at the local level, certainly, but not beyond that. TH1980 (talk) 01:45, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Oregon and Food and drink. matt91486 (talk) 05:17, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per GNG (disclaimer: stub creator). She is NOT only known for her television appearance. There is plenty of coverage in reputable sources specifically documenting her career in both California and Oregon. I've expanded the stub with sources confirming multiple roles at various restaurants and receipt of Eater Young Gun 2015 award. Not to mention, she is also a 2-time James Beard Rising Star semi-finalist. The article now has 12 citations and there are others to add. Also, nominator didn't even give an assessment of sourcing... Keep and expand! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: on the basis of improvements and additional citations.--Ipigott (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:HEY. We have stories primarily about her (the first eight footnotes in the current version) in news venues ranging over a 1000-mile span from Portland to San Diego and over a time span from 2016 to now. We also have three somewhat-noteworthy accomplishments (the TV series and two awards), beyond merely working at a restaurant. So I think the pass of WP:GNG and WP:BIO1E is now clear. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:HEY passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Thanks to the sources found since nomination. MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:29, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Financial Performances and Quality in Services Award[edit]

Financial Performances and Quality in Services Award (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 sources, or claim of notability. This may be a part of a series of articles that are made by socks of an organisation. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Technology_for_peace

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Harry_Anastasiou Obermallen (talk) 22:53, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete ROTM business award. Mccapra (talk) 05:23, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Nothing notable about this award. JayJay^{What did I do?} 23:16, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No sources, no nothing. Delete. --LordPeterII (talk) 20:05, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non notable award lacks sources.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:29, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Innovation and Quality in Services Award[edit]

Innovation and Quality in Services Award (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article doesn't have any decent sources to back it up, and the award isn't notable from the research that I have done. Obermallen (talk) 22:28, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete ROTM business award. Mccapra (talk) 05:24, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Nothing notable about this award. JayJay^{What did I do?} 23:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Lacks coverage in independent sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:59, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Obermallen (talk) 06:40, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canan Öztoprak[edit]

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

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

This article has hardly any sources besides a poorly made website that was archived. Nor could I find anything that would indicate that this person has a solid claim of notability. Obermallen (talk) 22:21, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, Cyprus, and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 22:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I’ve added a number of sources. Mccapra (talk) 06:06, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. The hesitant argument supporting merger is outweighed by the concerns about original research; however, if someone wishes to work on verifying content and merging it selectively using a userspace copy, I would be willing to provide one. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:23, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pueblo Christianity[edit]

Pueblo Christianity (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)

Created by a recently-blocked WP:SOCK (see here) and fails WP:GNG. Only a creative essay that attempts to invent the concept of "Pueblo Christianity" in violation of WP:OR and WP:NOTESSAY. Any relevant information on this topic can be added to New Mexico, History of New Mexico, or Pueblo. Novemberjazz 19:36, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and New Mexico. Shellwood (talk) 19:38, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment this is a tough one. It seems to be well-sourced, but I haven't checked each and every source for reliability. They seem to talk about stuff in the article but it's been strung together to draw a conclusion that may or may not be there.Oaktree b (talk) 21:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I commented a while back on the talk page that the article isn't about Pueblo Christianity and doesn't quote Pueblo voices or cite Pueblo sources. Even the author admitted it was more of a general article about New Mexican Christianity — and is really only about Roman Catholicism and not other Christian sects, so a complete misnomer. Yuchitown (talk) 23:01, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

• Comment possibly merge very selectively to Puebloans. Jahaza (talk) 03:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps redirect to Puebloans#Feast days? The Puebloans article mentions that Roman Catholicism is widespread among Pueblos. Most of the other material in Pueblo Christianity is simply Spanish-influenced New Mexican culture not distinctly Pueblo. Yuchitown (talk) 15:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

• Weak delete There is something here insofar as the concept may exist under a different name and similar Christian groupings (eg Saint Thomas Anglicans) achieve notability. However, this article woefully fails to establish this without original research and a cursory search fails to yield anything that could save it. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:39, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Pugh[edit]

Josh Pugh (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)

Does not meet WP:GNG, sources lack in-depth coverage. Everything is not independent (such as an interview) or just a minor-mention, with the possible exception of "FRINGE 2019", but that is not enough. MB 19:33, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and England. MB 19:33, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is one of countless junk biography articles about random people from an indiscriminate mass-creator, so please keep the deletions coming. — Smuckola(talk) 20:02, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete He's still performing, but mentions are only trivial/in passing. No substantial sources found. Comedian of the year might provide reliability, but I couldn't find any sources that mention it. Oaktree b (talk) 21:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Nothing notable can be found to warrant an article. The subject won a local stand-up comedian contest and that appears to be it. Nothing substantial. Sorely fails WP:GNG. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 01:12, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - As far as I can see does not meet notability in terms of work or coverage. Dunarc (talk) 18:49, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mimi (footballer)[edit]

Mimi (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)

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 18:00, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 18:00, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete Could not find any news coverage. If somebody could evaluate Angolan sources, that would be helpful. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:91D8:B29C:76C9:CBB (talk) 18:31, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Angola-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. As IP says, there might be sources in Angola - the issues we don't seem to have them. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 20:01, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:26, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Margarete (footballer)[edit]

Margarete (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)

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:59, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:59, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Angola. Shellwood (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 20:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails WP:GNG Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 21:34, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lídia[edit]

Lídia (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:58, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:58, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Angola. Shellwood (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 20:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ladaínha[edit]

Ladaínha (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Angola. Shellwood (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 20:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indira (footballer)[edit]

Indira (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)

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Angola. Shellwood (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 20:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - stats stub that fails WP:GNG as well as guidelines mentioned by nom Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was speedy keep. (non-admin closure) Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:34, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Upendra Mahato[edit]

Upendra Mahato (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)

Being a leader of a non-residential Nepalese organisation abroad don't make him notable for wikipedia as per general notability guidelines. Possible COI. PlayOboe (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nepal. PlayOboe (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:08, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep - AFD created by WP:SOCK. Definitely, passes WP:GNG as the topic consists of reputable-reliable-secondary sources from Nepal. Listed as shareholders of offshore companies (Panama Papers) is huge in itself. No further explanation is needed I guess. Kind regards, — Tulsi 24x7 03:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:20, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dorcacia[edit]

Dorcacia (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:48, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:48, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Angola. Shellwood (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 20:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - can't find any relevant coverage Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:36, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chiquita (footballer)[edit]

Chiquita (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)

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Angola. Shellwood (talk) 19:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bia (Angolan footballer)[edit]

Bia (Angolan 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)

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Angola-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:12, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ana Costa[edit]

Ana Costa (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:45, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:45, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Angola. Shellwood (talk) 19:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - appears to fail WP:SPORTBASIC as well as BASIC, can't see any alternative to deletion Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:03, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alegria (footballer)[edit]

Alegria (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)

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:44, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:44, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Angola. Shellwood (talk) 19:17, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:56, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

María Da Cruz[edit]

María Da Cruz (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. The sources in google news are trivial listings or brief match recaps. Avilich (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:17, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Beep! Beep! Back Up the Truck[edit]

Beep! Beep! Back Up the Truck (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 The Banner talk 17:35, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 19:17, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: An article created and predominantly edited by BeepVAS with a likely WP:COI. The archived May 2008 interview with the label founder is really just setting out the start-up proposition; searches are not finding evidence that the project attained notability. AllyD (talk) 13:50, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Cerqueira[edit]

Jennifer Cerqueira (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:30, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:30, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:53, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clàudia Cerdà[edit]

Clàudia Cerdà (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:26, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:26, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:53, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alba Cayuelas[edit]

Alba Cayuelas (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:55, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:52, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sònia Carrancà[edit]

Sònia Carrancà (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Available sources are databases, brief interviews and trivial mentions. Avilich (talk) 17:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:55, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:28, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the best that I can find is this basic Q&A but there is no significant analysis of her there Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:51, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Cardoso Osório[edit]

Maria Cardoso Osório (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 17:12, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 17:12, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:55, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:51, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alba Cañabate[edit]

Alba Cañabate (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 16:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 16:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:32, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - can find this passing mention in El Periodic but nothing better Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:51, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Borja[edit]

Laura Borja (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 16:53, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 16:53, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Marta Blasco[edit]

Marta Blasco (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was redirect to Electricity meter#Prepayment meters. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:20, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prepaid electricity meter[edit]

Prepaid electricity meter (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 already covered quite well at Electricity_meter#Prepayment_meters. This is a WP:CFORK which is not needed. I prodded and the prod was removed without explanation. Bruxton (talk) 15:53, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Bruxton (talk) 15:54, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• মোহাম্মদ মারুফ requested me to translate the article from Bengali Wikipedia, so I don't have interest. Mehedi Abedin 16:50, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I added new information and refs here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by মোহাম্মদ মারুফ (talk • contribs) 05:34, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  That information included a how-to guide and unnecessary detail, which should not be added on Wikipedia. See WP:NOTHOWTO. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:91D8:B29C:76C9:CBB (talk) 18:20, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 16:43, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or Redirect already covered quite well at Electricity_meter#Prepayment_meters. Lethweimaster (talk) 19:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Electricity_meter#Prepayment_meters. This section covers the topic better than the current page.

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teen Romance[edit]

Teen Romance (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)

Unremarkable release which does not satisfy WP:NSONGS or WP:NALBUMS. Only source found is the Metro which is not to be used per WP:METRO >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 15:08, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 15:08, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 16:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Does not satisfy WP:NSONGS or WP:NALBUMS.

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

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

The result was redirect to Lil Peep discography#Mixtapes. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:02, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lil Peep; Part One[edit]

Lil Peep; Part One (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)

Had a search of sources here and determined no significant coverage beyond its existence which satisfies WP:NALBUMS or WP:GNG >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 15:07, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 15:07, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 16:41, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Lil Peep discography#Mixtapes as an WP:ATD. This is a plausible search term. ✗plicit 01:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Lil Peep discography#Mixtapes. Fails WP:NALBUM per nom. A WP:BEFORE shows nothing beyond the source presented by nom. SBKSPP (talk) 22:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request undeletion of these articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:44, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Addictiv[edit]

Addictiv (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)

Everything (Addictiv album) (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 musician and an article about her album, neither of which are properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. The BLP asserts that she had singles peak #48 and #59 in the Canadian Hot 100, but (a) those chart positions aren't sourced at all, and even a Billboard search fails to verify them, and (b) they aren't high enough chart positions to confer an "inherent" notability freebie in the absence of any WP:GNG-worthy sourcing. The "Canadian Radio Music Awards", further, are not an award that satisfies NMUSIC's award criterion -- that goes to awards like the Junos or the Polaris that get media coverage, not just every single music award that exists, and even a Juno or Polaris nomination would still require reliable source support.
But the only sourcing here comes entirely from her own public relations -- even the "MuchMusic" footnote is really just her own EPK bio rather than journalistic or documentary content created by a MuchMusic broadcast personality -- and even on a ProQuest search for 14-year-old media coverage that wouldn't google, I just got a few glancing namechecks of her existence and absolutely nothing that would actually help salvage the article.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have more media coverage about her than I've been able to find. Bearcat (talk) 12:13, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 12:13, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 16:30, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I've tried and can find song listings for her, but no chart listings. Oaktree b (talk) 22:33, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Carvalho (footballer)[edit]

Laura Carvalho (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)

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 16:10, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 16:10, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:53, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:41, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clemente Domingo Hernández[edit]

Clemente Domingo Hernández (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:BASIC and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:53, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Luna Marcet[edit]

Luna Marcet (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 and WP:SPORTCRIT. Avilich (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Avilich (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:45, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:53, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:42, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no decent results found in Google searches or ProQuest Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:24, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result was delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:46, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of presidents of Nigeria by time in office[edit]

List of presidents of Nigeria by time in office (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 recent outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of presidents of Nigeria by home state this is an unsourced cross-categorisation. The information is already contained in any case at List of heads of state of Nigeria. Does not pass WP:LISTN. Mccapra (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Nigeria. Mccapra (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. List of heads of state of Nigeria already exists. De Guerre (talk) 15:15, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]