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 Archery at the 2004 Summer Olympics – Men's individual. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Phoutlamphay Thiamphasone[edit]

Phoutlamphay Thiamphasone (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)

He competed at the 2004 Summer Olympics but did not win a medal. A WP:BEFORE search didn't bring up sufficient sources to pass WP:GNG. An alternative to deletion could be Archery at the 2004 Summer Olympics – Men's individual as he didn't compete in more than one event. Suonii180 (talk) 23:47, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Laos. Suonii180 (talk) 23:47, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Archery at the 2004 Summer Olympics – Men's individual per nom. Fermiboson (talk) 16:30, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per nom (ref WP:NOLYMPIC). Transliterating his name to Lao to search for that is beyond me. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 03:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per above. --Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect WP:ATD-R WP:CHEAP Lightburst (talk) 19:23, 30 November 2023 (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 23:34, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Skillit (platform)[edit]

Skillit (platform) (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)

Coverage is routine about funding. WP:CORP does not seem to be met. SmartSE (talk) 23:57, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Websites, and New York. SmartSE (talk) 23:57, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Engineering. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep meets WP:GNG and WP:NPRODUCT. The article is about the software/platform, not about the company itself, so applying WP:NCORP is a stretch. [1], [2],[3], [4], [5] all articles include anaylsis and description of the Skillit platform (and are reliable sources per WP:RS, that's why on Wikipedia article, we have two lines about funding and a separate section about the platform. The article is very much expandable based on the provided references and is an encyclopedic topic in a niche industry like contruction, where software use is minimal. SHilhorst (talk) 14:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. https://www.inflection-point.us/ is a random blog - not a reliable source
2. Can't access but looks like routine coverage of funding
3. Can't access but looks like routine coverage of funding
4. Again a routine funding announcement
5. Again, can't access but from the headline clearly about funding. SmartSE (talk) 18:10, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, I disagree with the author of the article who voted keep - this subject does not meet the general notability guideline or the subject specific notability guideline set out in WP:PRODUCT. Rather, I agree with the source assessment conducted by the nominator, these sources are sheerly routine and not significant coverage at all. Routine articles about funding are not sufficient for notability. Article should be deleted. — MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:50, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 23:46, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: If this were to be a considered as a product-focused article, then the funding information should be eliminated from consideration as both irrelevant and non-independent (noting that these don't contribute to NCORP notability anyway, largely arise from press releases, and SAAS startups are basically their product). Coverage in listicles and similar minor comparisons of similar products/services doesn't demonstrate individual notability, and I can't see suitable SIGCOV of the platform on a quick BEFORE. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 04:07, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No indication of notability beyond routine coverage --VViking_TalkEdits 14:28, 30 November 2023 (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 06:35, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Haritha Gogineni[edit]

Haritha Gogineni (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)

Neither recognized as the most trusted astrologer (it's the real Indian award), nor as a businessperson BoraVoro (talk) 13:39, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Astrology, and Andhra Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:43, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Unsure of the quality of the sources found [6] is basically a paragraph with lots of photos, typical of other sources. This is listed [7] in Gsearch, but the website only returns html code, looks like a coding error. How do we feel about the other sources out there, they are flowery, but do mention her role as producer in several items? Oaktree b (talk) 14:55, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 13:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete based on what I've seen, I don't think this person is covered in RS that we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 15:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, quick search shows some sources that would be better suited for the subject matter based in india. This one, this, and this. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:31, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  These are all either paid promotion, or indistinguishable enough from it that they might as well be; see WP:NEWSORGINDIA. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per my response immediately above. PR-type sources can't be used to establish notability. "Most trusted astrologer" award? Really? Other than a couple claims of receipt of this award over the last couple years, I can't even verify that this is a real thing. Who awards it? What are the selection criteria? If an astrologer casts a horoscope in the forest, but there's no one around to read it, is it still bunk? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Lots of hits, all with ridiculous titles that cast massive doubt on reliability. No evidence of any other attention given by any third party. Fermiboson (talk) 16:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - None of the sources seem reliable enough to establish notability. Sgubaldo (talk) 18:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – If Wikipedia started listing every such fantasist, there'd be no end to it. MisterWizzy (talk) 08:39, 27 November 2023 (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!} 22:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thorden Hessel Christophersen[edit]

Thorden Hessel Christophersen (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 person simply does not exist. A total WP:HOAX. Thanks to @Oceanh for bringing it to light.

• The first reference is bogus. NBL1 is shorthand for Norsk biografisk leksikon, 1st edition, where volume 3 came out in 1926, long before the subject would have accomplished anything to warrant encyclopedic inclusion. Above all, the purported author Dahl was not born yet.
• It then follows that the person does not have an entry in the aforementioned volume 3, which under "Christophersen" only contains the three brothers Christian Eilert Rasch Christophersen, Peter Christophersen and Wilhelm Christopher Christophersen.
• The subject does not have an entry in the second edition either. Furthermore, the entry for his brother would have informed of any family member who also had entries, because this is the style of this biographical dictionary.
• The second reference exists, but doesn't support what it claims.
• The third reference is ludicrous; why would a book about theatre history from 1889 be a reference to support facts that purportedly happened in the 1940s or 1950s?
• The subject is not a family member of the purported family in the 1910 census or 1920 census
• There are no search hits in Norway's National Library for any conceiveable spelling of the subject's name.
• The claim that Den nasjonale regjering had informants working directly for them is baseless. Informants worked through Sicherheitsdienst/Gestapo, Abwehr or Statspolitiet.

Worst of all, the creator has edited lots of other articles, vandalizing some, at least including the subject's alleged brother. Most of the ensuing discussion should adress the actions of this user. Geschichte (talk) 19:21, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Per nom. I also couldn't find anything online about this supposed figure. Sgubaldo (talk) 23:24, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I encountered the story of Halfdan Olaus Christophersen early in my career, it's become a favorite but I've always felt the section of his time in the Norwegian resistance movement could use some more content. I have family in Tallin and there is a rich Norwegian immigrant community here, including the Christophersen (Cristofersen) family. The references would all be perfectly suitable if Hessel Christophersen happened to be found. Perhaps if I had some help finding references, we could keep the article? GourmetBean (talk) 08:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the article creator, who of course does not try to refute a single of the findings stated above. I am at a loss for words regarding GourmetBean's behavior. Geschichte (talk) 09:23, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Based on the explanation in the first comment there, this seems to be a pile of bunk; I can't find mentions of this person. Oaktree b (talk) 14:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Nothing useful in Gbooks, but it hits to the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (among only 5 listings), Scholar and Jstor are bare... appears to be a made up story. Oaktree b (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. No WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  // Timothy :: talk  14:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete WP:V is policy. The article's creator GourmetBean only has 59 edits so we can cut them slack and outline policy. Please keep on contributing but when starting an article make sure there is plenty of WP:RS - use Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources to determine what RS is. I added a welcome template to their website since I cannot see that they ever had one. Lightburst (talk) 19:33, 30 November 2023 (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 06:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Economic Times[edit]

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

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the general and organization-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:29, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Organizations, Business, Companies, and Bangladesh. UtherSRG (talk) 19:29, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 23 November 2023 (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 06:37, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sven-Olof Walldoff[edit]

Sven-Olof Walldoff (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the general and music maker-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Sweden. UtherSRG (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 23 November 2023 (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 Children's Theatre Company. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Plays for New Audiences[edit]

Plays for New Audiences (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is a stub. Content should be merged into Children's Theatre Company and Theatre for Young Audiences TheSavageNorwegian 21:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. TheSavageNorwegian 21:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Illinois, Minnesota, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• I realize now that I could merge this content over to Children's Theatre Company myself and make this page a redirect. Apologies for my haste in nominating for deletion. TheSavageNorwegian 21:18, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• I agree that this content should be a section within the CTC article. References elsewhere can be linked to that section. Kablammo (talk) 11:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge (the cited material) to Children's Theatre Company. Despite a reasonable number of search results, I found no evidence that the subject is independently notable. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:16, 30 November 2023 (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 North Carolina Court of Appeals#Former judges as a viable ATD since no further input is forthcoming Star Mississippi 03:25, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Brook[edit]

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

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

the subject fails GNG, notability under NPOL is questionable but I could not find any RS with SIGCOV of the subject. The page was mainly a copy-paste job from official press releases and still reads like a promo piece. The only sources are a campaign website, a press release and ballotopedia. hroest 19:03, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. hroest 19:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or redirect to North Carolina Court of Appeals#Former judges Subject should meet WP:NPOL for holding a statewide office that is normally elected. I understand that here Brook was appointed and not elected, but the position is a statewide elected position and I think the NPOL presumption applies to appointees if they're appointed to a normally elected office. However, if there is not enough sourcing to write a good WP:BLP due to the short tenure in the position then we should redirect it to the office he held. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:53, 23 November 2023 (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 Star Wars: Jedi Knight. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Katarn[edit]

Kyle Katarn (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 SIGCOV and Notability, probably the sources mostly based on rankings/listicles only I think. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 21:56, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy. Shellwood (talk) 22:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep While the sourcing in this article IS indeed terrible, a cursory glance at Google News shows a large amount of discussion, albeit it can be hard to see the trees amongst the Valnet forest.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 09:07, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Merge A closer examination of the google sources shows that there's not actually that much said about him as a character, at least enough to really work for SIGCOV. If they utilize him in the films or current canon that may change, but for now it doesn't feel like it's there.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:48, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Star Wars: Jedi Knight. I am unconvinced that he is standalone notable - SIGCOV could not be found. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:17, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect or merge to Star Wars: Jedi Knight. Majority of article is in-universe content and reception is pretty threadbare. Beating a 40-year-old game character in a fan poll is hardly worth writing home about. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 00:34, 28 November 2023 (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. ^Complex/_Rational 22:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Justina Baltrūnaitė[edit]

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

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

The subject, a Lithuanian women's footballer, has not received enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. All I found in my searches were passing mentions like 1, 2, and 3. JTtheOG (talk) 20:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Lithuania. JTtheOG (talk) 20:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SIGCOV here [8]. Respublik (talk) 07:33, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:00, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:04, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Doesn't Meet neither WP:GNG nor WP:BIO. Micheal Kaluba (talk) 16:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete does not satisfy WP:BIO.---Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:24, 30 November 2023 (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 List of Moldova women's international footballers. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mihaela Guma[edit]

Mihaela Guma (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)

Redirect to List of Moldova women's international footballers. The subject has not received sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG. All that came up in my searches were passing mentions like 1, 2, and 3. JTtheOG (talk) 20:21, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Moldova. JTtheOG (talk) 20:21, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect as above. GiantSnowman 19:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of Moldova women's international footballers---Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:25, 30 November 2023 (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!} 22:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lana Osiņina[edit]

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

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

The subject, a Latvian women's footballer, has not received enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. All I found in my searches were passing mentions like this. JTtheOG (talk) 20:17, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Latvia. JTtheOG (talk) 20:17, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:04, 24 November 2023 (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. ^Complex/_Rational 22:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rabija Dervishi[edit]

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

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

The subject, a Macedonian women's footballer, has not received sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG. All I found in my searches were passing mentions like 1, 2, and 3. JTtheOG (talk) 20:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and North Macedonia. JTtheOG (talk) 20:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:04, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- per above.-Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:33, 30 November 2023 (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. ^Complex/_Rational 22:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brigita Partikaitė[edit]

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

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

The subject, a Lithuanian women's footballer, has not received enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. All I found in my searches were passing mentions like 1, 2, and 3. JTtheOG (talk) 20:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Lithuania. JTtheOG (talk) 20:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails WP:GNG--Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:34, 30 November 2023 (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 no consensus‎ which does not preclude a redirect if sourcing is found to be insufficient Star Mississippi 03:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Saraswat Vidyalaya[edit]

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

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

No evidence of notability * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 November 2. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Offline} 00:01, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Goa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, in the past, schools in India have had a fair amount of coverage discovered in ProQuest, which is down for TWL right now, so we might want to take this one slowly. —siroχo 04:57, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Mapusa#Education if insufficient coverage to establish notability. The college and high school exists. Rupples (talk) 01:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Source. Found this [9]. Snippet view. Can't track the whole book to see if additional content but have added to article. Rupples (talk) 03:34, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There is indeed a lot of coverage on ProQuest. Eg. A protest: [10]. Sports [11][12] etc. Other local coverage: [13][14]. There's a lot more there to sort through as well. —siroχo 04:10, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes. Also moving towards a keep, but the article needs a bit more usable sourcing. As of now, it's not quite there. Rupples (talk) 05:44, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A second opinion on these newly located sources would be helpful as well as an assessment if they provide adequate SIGCOV.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: third relist in hopes of more discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:07, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Mapusa#Education. Routine news any school would receive does not establish notability. Fails GNG and NORG, nothing found from WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimothyBlue (talk • contribs) 22:48, 30 November 2023 (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 Pikmin#Protagonists. ^Complex/_Rational 22:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Olimar[edit]

Captain Olimar (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 SIGCOV and Notability, relying on RefBombing to try and give the semblance of some bulk to the article. There's little discussion about him as an actual character, and even the sources acknowledge he's essentially a blank canvas. It has the hallmarks of the same problems facing many other Smash Bros. character articles that were previously redirected, just with less overall salvageable information. Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:50, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:50, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - to Pikmin#Protagonists. Plausible search term. The "reception" in the article is laughably weak and full of bloat and insignificant commentary (I removed a passing mention about how a source called him the smallest Smash Bros character, for example.) Open to reconsidering if better sourcing is found, but it's not there based on what I've seen so far. Sergecross73 msg me 19:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect Per nom and Sergecross, this character isn't standalone notable based on my own searches. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:00, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - Per nom and Sergecross. This article is very weak and, if the underdeveloped reception has anything to go by, hasn't developed much notability or discussion outside of "he's in Smash". --ThomasO1989 (talk) 00:34, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per WP:ATD. I believe that sources might exist, but I couldn't find them. Redirect would WP:PRESERVE the edit history and allow someone to split this out if sources are found. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:39, 29 November 2023 (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 List of Atlus games , which has a consensus slight edge. Target can be adjusted as a matter of editorial judgement and doesn't require a relist Star Mississippi 03:28, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Naname De Magic![edit]

Naname De Magic! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There does not appear to have any sources about it, even after over a decade being tagged as having no citations. For a Japanese exclusive game it also having no Japanese article seems very indicative there is no notability to the game. GamerPro64 18:34, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. GamerPro64 18:34, 23 Novemberj 2023 (UTC)
• Delete I only see Wikipedia mirrors and no reliable independent sources in English. Prepared to reconsider if any good Japanese sources are found. Mccapra (talk) 19:17, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It appears that Naname De Magic! (ななめでまじっく！) was covered twice in Gamest magazine (by different writers, on only 1 page in both issues) according to this website: http://www.netlaputa.ne.jp/~dummy/gamest/game/h_n.html, although I have no idea if these issues have scans online, and thus how significant the coverage is. toweli (talk) 16:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One of the issues (no. 119) is available on the Internet Archive: https://ia902505.us.archive.org/10/items/gamest0119/gamest0119.pdf (page 182 in the magazine, page 194 in the .pdf). toweli (talk) 16:47, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This really would require someone who can read Japanese text to figure out what they're even saying. GamerPro64 05:17, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can just point a cell phone with Google Translate in camera mode at your computer monitor, and you can get a rough GTranslate version of the text. It's not super-deep (i.e. it's not "games journalism" like Wikipedia prefers it written in a sober voice about strengths and weakness, but rather a for-kids style explanation of the plot and game mechanics. SnowFire (talk) 17:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of Atlus games. This game clearly exists and was from a major publisher per links above, but it is probably best covered as a simple list entry, perhaps with a paragraph. (Maybe a spin-off article like "List of minor Atlus games" or something? Title is not great, but idea being a place to merge games worth a section of coverage but not a full article.) SnowFire (talk) 17:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - F-Zero#Plot. List of Atlus games as an alternative. — MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:52, 1 December 2023 (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 F-Zero#Plot which can be re-visited, target wise, as a matter of editorial judgement should a character list come into existence Star Mississippi 03:30, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Falcon[edit]

Captain Falcon (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 SIGCOV and notability, relying on mostly small quick statements to try and give it any semblance of a body via WP:REFBOMB. We have a situation here where the sources *themselves* point out there's nothing to say about the character outside of the old meme regarding his voice lines, and even then trying to turn up discussion regarding them has been fruitless.

In the end, it's the same problem as many other Smash Bros. focused character articles. Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep While I see the nom's point about a lot of these references being short, references 10 and 35 seem to be independent, non-trivial RS coverage of the character. Jclemens (talk) 08:16, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• 10 is a "How to" guide for the character though, and one done for every character in the series on the site (complete with a table of contents in there).--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:44, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to F-Zero#Plot - while I strongly disagree with the logic behind boldly redirecting Captain Falcon of all people, the sources do not demonstrate SIGCOV exists in more than a select article. I am here wondering why there isn't a character list for the series yet, though. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:22, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I agree with the lack of SIGCOV. Media hardly comments about the character outside of Smash Bros. Context is limited to brief mentions. This leads to speculative information being added as seen in the first sentence of "Creation and characteristics". Half of that is not sourced. For interested parties, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of F-Zero characters as well. There appears to be meaningful information for the SNES F-Zero game so I've added the ref idea there. « Ryūkotsusei » 21:40, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That's a poorly argued AfD, as the topic of "List of F-Zero characters" is "F-Zero" and arguing as if it is "F-Zero characters" will yield inappropriate results like this. Furthermore, no ATDs were implemented, which is almost always wrong for an article of NN (or assessed as NN) fictional content. Jclemens (talk) 08:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I feel like I wasn't thorough enough back in 2020 as Hardcore Gaming 101 definitely has some things to say about the characters and other sources likely do as well. I probably wouldn't have !voted for its deletion now, knowing what I do. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:33, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Captain Falcon seems to be featured on page 74 of Things I Learned from Mario's Butt and some information on how he's uncommon among elite Melee players but it's borderline for me; I'm having trouble finding more sourcing. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:05, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  There's of course stuff from Game Rant, Screen Rant, CBR, etc., but WP:VG/S seems to downplay them as marginally reliable or unreliable. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, the consensus is that most of the Valnet sites are situational sources. The CBR article, in particular, would be unusable, since it was just published in July 2023. I'm not sure on the Game Rant and Screen Rant sources. While these were published prior to 2023, a number of editors are wary on using anything Valnet to demonstrate notability, a stance I don't particularly agree with.

  The Things I Learned from Mario's Butt source looks like it could be a good one. Just too bad Google doesn't allow us to access the whole page. MoonJet (talk) 18:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm able to get it by just clicking on the "preview" button. For those who can't, it's three paragraphs that are dedicated mostly to the physique of the character (and it describes the physical motion of what a "falcon punch" is). — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:32, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Speaking frankly I would urge some caution on citing Laura Kate Dale for *anything* given their track record. As for the sources overall, most are just dishing out factoids about the character than discussing him. Screen Rant's is about his gameplay, and is in regards to that particular game. Gameplay commentary can be a bit rough to cite because you need to be able to show there was some impact from it to really make it stick, while actually actually discussing the character via other sources and showing why they matter. As I said elsewhere I have no problem with Valnet for sourcing, but these are just not cutting the mustard.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The point of Valnet's sites are to create low effort, cheap content to get clicks. These sources are no exception, with some of the "top 10 facts" being things that aren't even real facts, like "he's shrouded in mystery". I'm sure I could come up with more interesting facts if I spent more than 10 minutes researching Falcon, but they get paid $5 per article so they have no reason to. This is to be strictly contrasted with more well researched articles and is why using them for purely informational purposes is the only real path forward with them. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The sites do produce decent editorial pieces every now and then. I think in general though folks need to consider *what* they can pull from a source that's meaningful vs a source existing. The whole "Facts You Didn't Know!" format certainly doesn't offer much and the above are just that. We've seen that with sources like that "1000 Greatest Video Game Characters" book though too, where most of the entries were just "here's this character's backstory".--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect Fails SIGCOV based on the current sources. The commentary is trivial and mostly about Smash Bros. and that does not demonstrate notability. This article needs a couple of good sources that discuss the character in detail, not just in passing. Fieryninja (talk) 19:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect Sadly, most of the sources were from Smash, nothing else. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 13:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per Zxcvbnm. Sadly there aren't more than trivial mentions here. A character list would be a good idea, but the main game article will suffice for now. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:48, 1 December 2023 (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. No clear indications that sourcing or notability requirements are met; the additional sources presented in the keep !votes are similar to those already present. ^Complex/_Rational 22:02, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adekunle Olayinka[edit]

Adekunle Olayinka (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)

Aside from UPE concerns, the articles seems to be filled with articles that are paid for. Olayinka holds the post of a special adviser to the Governor of Lagos State; which does not pass the bar for WP:NPOL. As an aspirant, sadly, Olayinka could not make it to the House of Representatives; again, fails NPOL. Neither does Olayinka meet the general notability guidelines independently. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 17:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Nigeria. Reading Beans (talk) 17:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Management and Engineering. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete does not pass NPOL and the sources cited are recycled press releases. Mccapra (talk) 19:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The person lacks coverage from credible sources. Micheal Kaluba (talk) 17:17, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Generally pass GNG 102.88.36.78 (talk) 13:29, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Clearly fails WP:NPOL. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Google search has multiple reliable sources from secondary independent sources.[15], [16] and [17] are enough to establish notability. 102.89.34.12 (talk) 04:56, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per all mentioned reasons above.- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:35, 30 November 2023 (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 as sourcing is found to be insufficient. However, if someone wants this as a draft to rename and scope, just ping me. Star Mississippi 03:32, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cure Alzheimer's Fund[edit]

Cure Alzheimer's Fund (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 appear to be a notable organization. I'm not seeing coverage that isn't PR-Newswire posts or first party. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:14, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Organizations, and Massachusetts. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete: I did find this article: [18], but it's mostly an interview, and this: [19], which is likely an editorialized press release. All other sources I found were either clearly PR, routine database or tax listings, or not independent of the foundation. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:05, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: It is a notable charity in the fight against Alzheimer. La coince (talk) 13:14, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • La coince, notability is demonstrated through coverage in reliable sources, which you have not demonstrated exist. I'm also super curious how you found this, considering that you haven't edited this project in half a year before reaching this nomination. By any chance, are you also user:CureAlzUser, since you added back the same content that I've removed as being out of scope and overly promotional? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    @The Squirrel Conspiracy I am not user:CureAlzUser, but feel free to have this checked. Let me also add that common courtesy would have required you to mention contributors of this page about the deletion process. La coince (talk) 16:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete it fails to adhere to Wikipedia's core content policies. Firstly, the article appears to be written in a promotional tone, highlighting the organization's achievements and funding efficiency without a balanced representation of independent, critical analysis, which goes against the Neutral Point of View policy. Secondly, the article lacks citations from reliable, third-party sources. Lastly, the notability of the organization is not well established through significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 13:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment There's a decent amount of coverage as they seem to be involved in some significant research, but not much of it is in-depth. A lot of it has to do with the Alzheimer’s Genome Project, which they provide funding for (this might be a notable project that would warrant a Wikipedia article).

The nonprofit is described as "aimed at accelerating research to bring about a cure for the disease" and The New York Times notes that they are "one of several foundations whose approach departs from the standard model employed by the National Institutes of Health and major medical foundations. These groups are intensely goal-directed and collaborative; they see the creation of new cures as a process that needs to be managed; and they bring a sense of urgency to the task". Mooonswimmer 14:04, 7 November 2023 (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, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as there is some minor interest via Google Trends. --Maxim Masiutin (talk)

• I don't see anything about Google Trends in Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 02:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Alzheimer's Genome Project, and trim down to focus on the project. While the fund likely fails WP:NCORP, the research project seems to meet academic notability criteria. Owen× ☎ 00:23, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For consideration of the late proposal to rename and re-scope the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: The fund doesn't seem to be independently notable. Cortador (talk) 20:24, 23 November 2023 (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 as it appears sourcing questions have been addressed Star Mississippi 03:33, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Haynie[edit]

Jim Haynie (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)

Speedy G4 declined as one of the refs is newer than those in the original article - that's one of precisely two refs and is an obit in the South Whidbey Record - so an obituary in a newspaper that "serves the south end of Whidbey Island, beginning with the Island gateway of Clinton, where Washington State ferries dock after crossing Puget Sound from the mainland and Seattle" is the only additional claim of notability to that which was deemed insufficient in 2017. Still fails WP:GNG; WP:NACTOR with minor roles throughout. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:30, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, United States of America, and Oklahoma. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:30, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Veteran actor with bit parts and no critical discussion of any of it. Long way from ACTOR. Oaktree b (talk) 16:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The article passes WP:NACTOR. He’s had significant roles in the films From Hollywood to Deadwood, Jack's Back, Staying Together (film), The Bridges of Madison County (film) and Take Five (TV series). The Film Creator (talk) 16:52, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I removed the speedy tag because the newer ref indicated that the article could not be the same article as the one deleted. Unfortunately, I gave up my admin bit while on 10-year hiatus, so I cannot see the deleted version to compare to this article. Alexandermcnabb, can you see the old version?

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, @A. B., I was going to ask you the same question - how can you see the first version! I've gone on the reasons from the original AfD and no activity on the part of the subject since that AfD took place - and then, encompassing your (perfectly valid) comment on the additional source changing the article, I took a look at that source and it doesn't give any more indication of a WP:GNG pass than existed back in 2017. Hence AfD... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:17, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:46, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I agree with The Film Creator above. He passes WP:NACTOR for his various significant roles in notable films/series. The interview in the LAT and the obituary in the Whidbey News-Times (the same that was published in South Whidbey Record) are not only good indications but can help improve the page.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:13, 8 November 2023 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO, no sources showing this meets NACTOR. Sources in article are an interview and database record, BEFORE showed nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Keep votes provide no sources, just ILIKEIT reasons.  // Timothy :: talk  05:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Again, no, this is not true. My !vote is partially based on the 2 sources in the page (both being SIGCOV RELIABLE INDEPENDENT coverage one an interview, true, but in the LAT, and the other perfectly secondary, mind you) and on his roles, and The Fim Creator’s one is based on the significance of his roles too, referring to a guideline. This has nothing to do with ’I like it’. So please, don’t comment upon other’s people !votes if it’s not in a collaborative spirit. You may disagree with others’ opinions but don’t dismiss their contributions to the discussion by presenting them erroneously. Thank you very much. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:19, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I wrote the German Wikipedia article about Haynie, which is more substantial, and have researched a bit about his career. He also has articles in three other languages, by the way. From my viewpoint many actors with lesser careers have English-language Wikipedia articles here. Haynie had quite decent supporting roles in well-known films like I Come in Peace, Sleepwalkers and The Bridges of Madison County (as Meryl Streep's film husband); also a major role in Staying Together. Not to mention a long list of television roles. More than 25 views on average show a public interest. The main reason why he did not get so many obituarys at the time of his death is that obviously this information wasn't given to the press for a long time. It could definitely have merited a Hollywood Reporter or Variety obituary. However, the Academy also listed him in their longer "In Memoriam list" for 2021. --Clibenfoart (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Source eval: from de.wp mentioned above.

Comments	Source
Mentions in footnotes, nothing close to WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.	1. Stephen J. Bottoms: The Theatre of Sam Shepard: States of Crisis. Cambridge University Press, 1998, ISBN 978-0-521-58791-4 (google.de [abgerufen am 6. Juni 2020]).
IMDB entry	2. ↑ Jim Haynie (IMDb). Abgerufen am 6. Juni 2020.
Obit with the normal problems associated with obits.	3. ↑ Jim Haynie: Feb. 6, 1940 - April 3, 2021. 2. Juli 2021, abgerufen am 27. Juli 2021 (amerikanisches Englisch).
Facebook	4. ↑ Post von seiner Ehefrau Maggie Causey auf Facebook. Abgerufen am 15. Juni 2021 (englisch).
Title indicates this is an obit, but not able to find anything on subject from the article or above link is blank. Editor above states "also listed him" and a mention in a list also fails WP:SIGCOV.	5. ↑ Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences: In Memoriam. Abgerufen am 15. Juni 2021 (englisch).

All fail WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.

The comment above The main reason why he did not get so many obituarys at the time of his death is that obviously this information wasn't given to the press for a long time. shows the problem with obits regarding WP:NPOV, WP:IS.  // Timothy :: talk  08:11, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Has had significant roles in multiple notable films and TV shows, more than enough to meet WP:NACTOR. Owen× ☎ 00:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:07, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I found some coverage for this actor on Newspapars.com and it's significant enough to get over the GNG bar in my view. The first three are solely about him and the other two I think display that some of his work was notable as well (received wide critical acclaim for True West, winning an Bay Area Theatre Critics Circle Award for his theater work. 1a,1b, 2, 3a, 3b, 4, 5. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2023 (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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:35, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Underdark (band)[edit]

Underdark (band) (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)

Why the page should be deleted: 1. No citations, exclusively primary sources, aside from a single metal.de review (https://www.metal.de/reviews/underdark-in-the-name-of-chaos-14520/) I couldn't find anything abt this band. 2. There is a more notable band called Underdark from the UK which would better suit this page, albeit I can't just replace the content on the page y'know. So unless this gets the deletion go-ahead I can't write about the band. That is all. Chchcheckit (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I agree with Chchcheckit here, the UK Band actually has a significant number of independent sources and is probably notable for an anti fascist stance as well. Perhaps the Polish sources have been drowned out by more recent coverage. I am also not a Polish metal fan, so if one could be found perhaps that would help here.Spiralwidget (talk) 17:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I think per looking at the previous discussion on this page from 2012 (which reached no consensus), one editor did suggest two sources from nowiny24 (which has a page on the polish wikipedia, albeit it is not found/logged on English Wikipedia, which is a problem regarding notable sources). Also: this band is not on polish wiki either (per prev. discussion as well). Chchcheckit (talk) 18:26, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Poland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:56, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: A brief search indicates that it indeed the UK band that is notable, not the Polish one, and with the band apparently not having released anything in 15 years, that is unlikely to change. Cortador (talk) 20:25, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete; only substantial sources I could find relate to the UK band. Darling (talk) 15:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I don't see how this meets WP:GNG. No pl wiki interwiki is a red flag too. I'll ping a Polish Wikipedian interested in music, User:Yurek88. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per above reasons--Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:39, 30 November 2023 (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!} 22:53, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maharishi Vastu Architecture[edit]

Maharishi Vastu Architecture (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 overly bloated article on an obscure set of design principles followed by the Maharishi cult is bizarre to say the least, but it is more problematically being propped up by sources which are published in low-quality journals without outside notice we would normally require for tests of fringe notability. The one-off comments in mainstream sources that are quotemined in the article seem to be present for one purpose only: to make it seem like this is an encyclopedic topic when really it's just thinly veiled propaganda. We need to start weeding this WP:Walled garden, and I think starting with this article makes sense. jps (talk) 16:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Religion, and Hinduism. jps (talk) 16:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- This appears to be a very sophisticated version of WP:NOTADVERT for a specific organisation. All of the nomination's points are also valid (GNG, primary sources, fringe, etc.). Cheers, Last1in (talk) 15:12, 30 November 2023 (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 kept per comments. Recipients of Padma Shri are notable. The article has been vandalized. ‎ Materialscientist (talk) 05:17, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pravakar Maharana[edit]

Pravakar Maharana (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:NARTIST an autobiography whose only claim to notability is a failed verification to an award. Theroadislong (talk) 16:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and India. Theroadislong (talk) 16:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, I'd say the claim is verifiably false [20] -- MacAddct1984 ^{(talk | contribs)} 16:27, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The claim is verificable. [21][22] ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 18:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Odisha-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:57, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clearly passes ANYBIO. Recipients of Padma Shri are notable and always kept in AfD. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 18:01, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Except the source doesn't support the award being given? and the photographs of the person do not match? Theroadislong (talk) 18:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See the edit history of the page. An unknown IP added that photo. I think that Pravakar Maharana really got that award and someone vandalised that page by inserting his own photo. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 18:11, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the photo is of Laxmi Narayan Maharana (see google search results). ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 18:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Happy to withdraw the nomination, as it seems like the article had been hijacked when I tagged it for AFD. Theroadislong (talk) 18:18, 23 November 2023 (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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:37, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023 Balochistan Security Checkpoint Attack[edit]

November 2023 Balochistan Security Checkpoint Attack (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Very unclear topic or notability. Draftifying to give the creator a chance to correct this had no result. Basically, we have an infobox and background section about a different event, we have one source which when one actually checks it out doesn't even mention the event, and another source not about this attack at all. So this is an unsourced and due to the lack of concrete info for me unverifiable article. If it can be verified, shown to be notable, and cleaned, fine (that's why I draftified it), but if not it needs to be deleted. Fram (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Terrorism, and Pakistan. Fram (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or draftify per nominator; the sources cited do not specifically mention any security checkpoint attack, and I couldn't find anything else that specific (other than the broader 2023 attacks), so fails WP:V. I would reconsider if other sources, perhaps in other languages, could be provided. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 15:28, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As said per the respected user i have added More sources to make the article reliable Rahim231 (talk) 16:40, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- This is a perfectly valid news event, but not an encyclopaedic subject. The sources are valid, but they simply report that it happened which does not clear the threshold for WP:EVENTCRIT. There is no secondary analysis of the event, and draftify won't change that. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 15:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- per above.Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:53, 30 November 2023 (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 02:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Square Deal (game)[edit]

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

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

I searched and it does not seem to be notable (by the way there is a card game which I assume is not related as this article mentions tiles) Chidgk1 (talk) 13:19, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:19, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Looking at the page on BGG it seems unlikely this topic meets WP:N. Hobit (talk) 17:54, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:21, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: It exists and has a few videos on youtube and I can buy it on Amazon, but that's not what we need for notability here. Unsourced article and I find nothing we can use in RS Oaktree b (talk) 15:29, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• The article is unsourced, and there is no GNG-contributing references I can find. Hence, it clearly should be deleted. VickKiang (talk) 02:12, 27 November 2023 (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 23:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whyte Chemicals[edit]

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

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails to general and company-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, Companies, United Kingdom, and England. UtherSRG (talk) 13:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Subsidiary of a company that doesn't even have a wiki page and turns up nothing in a search. Fails notability as per nom. Sgubaldo (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Little found on this company other than it being bought out of administration. Rupples (talk) 18:10, 28 November 2023 (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 Richard Menta. as a viable ATD as at the moment Menta is not up foe deletion. Star Mississippi 03:35, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MP3 Newswire[edit]

MP3 Newswire (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 would appear to me that this website - it is online when I checked as part of WP:BEFORE is still active - fails any number of notability tests, including but not limited to WP:WEBPAGE, and WP:NCORP for relation to its parent companies or subsidiaries, such as they may be.

I note that

• the deletion dicussion was closed 11 Aug 2005.
• the article was recreated on 28 September 2005
• Given its almost 20 years existence in WP:ARTICLESPACE, it would appear to me reasonable to review the 2005 deletion.
• a number of articles link here
• it would appear to me that it may quite possibly be a plausible Redirect to either an article of sections in an article - and if so which ones?

As always, please do prove me wrong about this!

Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 09:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Music, and Websites. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:22, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Results are all Newswires talking about mp3, nothing much for the site. This is all I got [23]. Oaktree b (talk) 15:14, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  or redirect to Richard Menta, but his article is about as sparse... Oaktree b (talk) 15:20, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, I had considered that and gave up, so I PRODded Menta, only to facepalm when Explicit the admin pointed out that I'd missed the PROD in the deletion logs. I might take his advice to take that to AfD, too. Until then, I decided it was a long shot and decided to try to G4 this. Instead of a side of WP:TROUT with a decline, reviewing admin Shirt58 decided to take time from their busy admin duties to come to AfD themself. A pleasant surprise! Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:34, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment These were cited in the last deletion discussion, but they're trivial [24], [25]. Oaktree b (talk) 15:22, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Appears to be blogger Richard Menta. IgelRM (talk) 23:49, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikiquote Richard Menta about MP3 Newswire IgelRM (talk) 00:14, 25 November 2023 (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 14:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shri Shiv Chhatrapati College[edit]

Shri Shiv Chhatrapati College (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)

Zero third party coverage. Sohom (talk) 14:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:22, 23 November 2023 (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 11:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deepshikha Secondary School[edit]

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

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

yvanyblog^(talk) 09:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. yvanyblog^(talk) 09:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this is a mess. I can't find proof that this school, in this location exists. There is another school, Deepshikha Secondary Boarding School, in Ghorahi, which is not Bandipur, as this school purportedly is. No citations, no decent categories. Can it. Kazamzam (talk) 11:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete subject does not seem to be notable. Not much news coverage. Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:55, 30 November 2023 (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 14:11, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tse Tin Yau[edit]

Tse Tin Yau (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)

stub on an unnotable sportsperson. fails general notability guideline. sourced to databases (note: second source is completely dead). preliminary search for sources turns up nothing but unreliable sources and whatever this is. ltbdl (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Hong Kong. ltbdl (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The Hong Kong Footballers book found is just made up of Wikipedia content, so it is not a RS, either. -2pou (talk) 22:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per the insufficient coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. I found these sources:
  1. Tsang, Ngan-ping 鄧永賢; Dang, Wing-jin 鄧永賢 (2011-12-07). "三代足球人　心繫一個夢" [Three generations of football players share a dream]. Apple Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2023-11-24. Retrieved 2023-11-24.

     The article notes: "謝天佑與曾文輝同是20歲，同是從小便希望可以成為職業足球員，還憧憬如外國球星般賺取豐厚報酬；可是入行後便發覺，現實與理想有很大距離，但兩人仍咬緊牙關，希望可在球圈踢出成績。... 5歲接觸足球，中一已夢想做職業球員的謝天佑，在流浪經過兩年青年軍時代後，獲提升到甲組，開始全職踢波，月薪4,000元；就算後來加到5,000元，間中有點獎金，只是從屯門乘車到市區練波已月花過千。 ... 從流浪轉會到港菁的謝天佑（左），今季操練較以往積極。"

     From Google Translate: "Tse Tin Yau and Tsang Man Fai are both 20 years old. They both dreamed of becoming professional footballers since they were young, and they also dreamed of earning huge rewards like foreign stars. However, after entering the industry, they discovered that reality and ideals are very different. Although the distance was huge, the two still gritted their teeth and hoped to achieve results in the football circle. ... Tse Tin Yau, who started playing football at the age of 5 and had already dreamed of becoming a professional player in the first grade of secondary school, won the title of Wan after two years of wandering in the youth army. He was promoted to Group A and started playing wave full-time, with a monthly salary of NT$4,000. Even if it was later increased to NT$5,000, with occasional bonuses, just taking the bus from Tuen Mun to the city to practice wave already cost more than 1,000 yuan a month. ... Transferred from Wandering Tse Tin Yau (left), who arrived in Hong Kong, is training more actively this season than before.

  2. Tsoi, Wai-hang 蔡偉恆, ed. (2010-01-10). "流浪大中球員打鬥" [Wandering big and medium players fighting] (PDF). Ta Kung Pao (in Chinese). p. B10. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2023-11-24. Retrieved 2023-11-24.

     The article notes: "昨晚在九龍灣公園上演的 1 場甲組聯賽又演 「全武行」，比賽末段流浪右閘謝天佑襲擊 大中球員盧俊傑後又與燕鳴昊 「肉搏」，結 果雙雙被逐。... 由於謝天佑言語上辱及盧俊傑的母親，盧母賽後大聲指罵流浪總監李輝立之餘又在 "

     From Google Translate: "Last night, a League A match played at Kowloon Bay Park was another "all-out show". At the end of the game, the wandering right-backer Tse Tin Yau attacked the big player Lu Junjie and then had a "hand-to-hand" fight with Yan Minghao. [more discussion about Tse's involvement in the fight] ... Because Tse Tin Yau verbally insulted Lu Junjie's mother, Lu's mother loudly criticized the wandering director Li Huili after the game."

  3. "中国香港出征六城会足球预赛 U17港脚会战武汉" [Hong Kong, China, goes to the Six Cities Club Football Preliminary U17 Hong Kong Football Team to face Wuhan] (in Chinese). Sohu. 2007-04-13. Archived from the original on 2023-11-24. Retrieved 2023-11-24.

     The article notes: "谢天佑 TSE Tin Yau 中场 31-07-1991"

  The first source provides significant coverage, the second source covers a fight Tse Tin Yau was involved in (which I am not considering to be significant coverage), and the third source is a passing mention. There is insufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Tse Tin Yau (traditional Chinese: 謝天佑; simplified Chinese: 谢天佑) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 11:58, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete lack of coverage in multiple independent sources. Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:56, 30 November 2023 (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. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 07:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DarwinHealth[edit]

DarwinHealth (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)

American biomedical company fails WP:GNG, WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH and basically WP:NOTCRUNCHBASE. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Biology, Medicine, and United States of America. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep meets WP:GNG. This article in Science and this article in The Economist are independent and very in-depth. It is a major research organization that has developed algorithms — potentially capable of cracking cancer's code, as covered in WSJ. Being a research organization, most of its coverage is in academia. A search on Google Scholar brings an extensive coverage about DarwinHealth. Sklerk (talk) 14:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The Science article cited by Sklerk is secondary and in some depth, as is the WSJ piece. The Economist article doesn't mention DarwinHealth at all, though, so it needs to go, but WP:NCORP is just met by the sources given. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 15:08, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I'm unconvinced by the rationale presented so far. The first editor to keep is the author of the article, which, while it does not invalidate their submission, I do consider there to be a potential bias. I note they state GNG is met by listing a bunch of references. I disagree that they constitute extensive coverage. Most are passing references. This organization does good work, clearly. However the "coverage" tends to merely mention the research undertaken rather than in-depth information about the organization itself. I do not see the sustained, significant, in-depth coverage required by our subject-specific notability guideline for corporations and organizations. Just my view, though. — MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 08:44, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 11:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Rather than having in-depth details about the organisation, the "coverage" usually consists of mentioning the research that was done. I fail to see the consistent, noteworthy coverage to meet subject-specific notability guideline for businesses and organisations demands. Fails NCORP. 2409:40F3:A:3510:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 03:53, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, you've commented here at random without actually reading the article or the comments above, where in-depth sources have been shared. 154.21.186.89 (talk) 20:58, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WeirdNAnnoyed. Some in-depth coverage already reviewed by WeirdNAnnoyed and additional coverage when I did a proper WP:BEFORE. Personalized Drug Screening for Functional Tumor Profiling by Victoria El-Khoury, Tatiana Michel, Hichul Kim, Yong-Jun Kwon (published in 2022) is independent of the subject and covers the organization directly and in-depth. 154.21.186.89 (talk) 21:01, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: per sources found by WeirdNAnnoyed. I'm surprised Andrea Califano doesn't have an article.  // Timothy :: talk  00:06, 1 December 2023 (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 14:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rohit Mehta[edit]

Rohit Mehta (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 NACTOR. Google reveals various hits on another person of the same name who is a crypto CEO of some sort, and various other actors with the same first name, before this person even shows up (and it's a passing mention in a gossip rag). Sources in the article are gossip or primary. Previously deleted as A7 and G5, though I of course can't see why that is. Fermiboson (talk) 11:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. Fermiboson (talk) 11:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination, you beat me to it, thanks. All I can find about him is a few gossip pages about his wedding, and obvious paid placement. In case you're still wondering about the G5 deletion from the last AFD, it was User:Abh01, a sockpuppet of User:Amansharma111, and this one will probably be flushed down the same pipe. Note that it was originally created as Rohit (Indian Actor) before I moved it to his actual name. Two weeks ago it was Rohit (Indian actor). Wikishovel (talk) 12:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and Himachal Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:46, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This doesn’t even need a nomination. Creator is a sockpuppet per G5. Nonetheless, it is wholly promotional with only a few sources that do not make it notable enough. HarukaAmaranth ^春_香 14:06, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and salt - non-notable actor; page repeatedly recreated by likely undisclosed paid sockpuppets. This version was also created by a sockpuppet and is similar enough to the most recent deleted version (there are several) that it would qualify for G4 deletion had there been a complete deletion discussion, and would be eligible for G5 deletion if not for subsequent substantive editing. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:57, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Seconding suggestion to salt, if that matters. Fermiboson (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - References are mainly tabloid type references and nothing that shows either WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. I would say leave the AfD open instead of a G5 so we can discuss support for SALTING the page due to the WP:TENDENTIOUS attempts to re-create the page. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:59, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Mainly junk, tabloid references, created by a sock, name-dropping - strike three, page is out. Ravensfire (talk) 21:08, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per above. --Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:57, 30 November 2023 (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 Eritrean Premier League. Star Mississippi 03:38, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Denden FC[edit]

Denden FC (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 since 2011. It doesn't seem like it can be improved. When sources are available it can be recreated. Dl.thinker (talk) 11:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Dl.thinker (talk) 11:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Greenman (talk) 17:58, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:59, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Eritrean Premier League - the club does exist, see here, but doesn't look to be notable. GiantSnowman 19:03, 24 November 2023 (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 14:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Advance Concrete[edit]

Advance Concrete (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. Minimally sourced. Reads like product advertisement. Kleuske (talk) 10:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Software. Kleuske (talk) 10:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Reads like an ad, only primary sources, search brings up nothing but the company's website and this very Wikipedia article.Cortador (talk) 11:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Engineering. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per above.Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:58, 30 November 2023 (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) 10:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Advance Steel[edit]

Advance Steel (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. Hardly sourced. Reads like product advertisement. Kleuske (talk) 10:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Software. Kleuske (talk) 10:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Same deal as Advance Concrete: reads like an ad, only primary sources, searches bring up nothing significant.Cortador (talk) 11:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Engineering. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:NPRODUCT which requires "sustained coverage in reliable secondary sources." My searches for this product did not produce anything meeting that requirement.  Spintendo  02:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: as per above, fails WP:NPRODUCT.--Tumbuka Arch (talk) 08:58, 30 November 2023 (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) 10:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kathy Bunka[edit]

Kathy Bunka (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)

Canadian not notable diplomat with no indication of reliable sources. Delete Tls9-me (talk) 10:11, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, Iraq, Slovakia, Canada, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete coverage merely confirms she held roles rather than indepth to satisfy WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 23:13, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Just holding an office or role is not enough without the required RS coverage, which this article lacks. Delete. Go4thProsper (talk) 01:47, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. --Tumbuka Arch (talk) 09:37, 30 November 2023 (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. Star Mississippi 03:38, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Huang Renjie[edit]

Huang Renjie (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)

Chinese not notable chess player with no indication of reliable sources. Delete Tls9-me (talk) 10:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:

  People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

  • If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.

  Sources
  1. Chen, Yawen 陈雅雯 (2023-06-16). ""敢把皇帝拉下马"——国象甲联黄仁杰力擒韦奕旁记" ["Dare to bring down the emperor" - A side note of Huang Renjie's capture of Wei Yi by the National Chess Federation] (in Chinese). China.com [zh]. Archived from the original on 2023-11-24. Retrieved 2023-11-24.

     The article notes: "黄仁杰一直被称作中国国象界的新锐，是山东队重点培养的年轻棋手。作为2004年后出生的小将，黄仁杰的成绩也足够优秀，曾获得2018年世界青少年锦标赛超快棋赛14岁组第一名，2019年第四届全国智力运动会获国际象棋少年组个人及团体双料冠军，以及2021年获男子国象世界冠军分区赛中国区冠军。本次常规赛前八轮比赛中，黄仁杰取得5胜2平1负的不俗战绩，也是山东队的主要得分手。"

     From Google Translate: "Huang Renjie has always been called a rising star in China's national chess world and is a young chess player that the Shandong team focuses on training. As a young player born after 2004, Huang Renjie's performance is also good enough. He won the first place in the 14-year-old group of the 2018 World Youth Championship Blitz, and won both the individual and team awards in the chess youth group at the 4th National Mind Games in 2019. Champion, and the China Champion of the Men's National Physics World Championship Division in 2021. In the first eight rounds of this regular season, Huang Renjie achieved a good record of 5 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss, and is also the main scorer of the Shandong team."

  2. Ge, Huizhong 葛会忠 (2020-01-17). "16岁小棋手黄仁杰与国际象棋"一见钟情"" [16-year-old chess player Huang Renjie fell in love with chess at first sight]. 中国体育报 [China Sports Daily] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2023-11-24. Retrieved 2023-11-24.

     The article notes: "尚不满16岁的黄仁杰是一位下棋认真、吃饭“不够认真”的少年。1月16日，第二届“滨海新区杯”国际象棋中国公开赛在天津结束了第六轮的争夺，赛后和小伙伴一起吃小火锅时，两人并不是面对面坐着边聊边吃，在火锅开锅前黄仁杰也没有像大多数同龄人那样拿出手机玩游戏，而是打开手机里的国际象棋棋局认真研究起来，... 在去年的第四届全国智力运动会上，黄仁杰代表山东队获得了少年男子个人和少年男子团体两枚金牌。"

     From Google Translate: "Huang Renjie, who is not yet 16 years old, is a young man who plays chess seriously but is not serious enough about eating. On January 16, the second "Binhai New Area Cup" China Chess Open ended in the sixth round in Tianjin. After the game, when eating hotpot with friends, the two did not sit face to face and chat while eating. Before the hot pot started, Huang Renjie did not take out his mobile phone to play games like most of his peers. Instead, he opened the chess game on his mobile phone and studied it carefully... At the Fourth National Mind Games last year, Huang Renjie represented Shandong The team won two gold medals for the Junior Men's Individual and Junior Men's Team."

  3. Chen, Yawen 陈雅雯 (2021-11-11). "青岛城阳队小将黄仁杰夺得"上海海湾杯"国际象棋新人王赛冠军" [Huang Renjie, a young player from Qingdao Chengyang Team, won the "Shanghai Gulf Cup" Chess Newcomer King Championship]. China.com [zh] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2023-11-24. Retrieved 2023-11-24.

     The article notes: "小将黄仁杰近来势头大好，2019年便帮助青岛城阳队以冠军之姿冲进甲级联赛。2021年初，黄仁杰代表兄弟队济南银丰队出战，夺取了第一届中国城市国际象棋联赛总冠军。今年五月底，黄仁杰在“华颐杯”2021年国际象棋男子世界冠军 分区赛（中国区）中，击败各路强手，登上冠军宝座，成功闯进世界杯。有诸多成绩在前，本次黄仁杰夺取新人王赛冠军，是意外之喜，也在情理之中。"

     From Google Translate: "The young player Huang Renjie has been gaining momentum recently. In 2019, he helped the Qingdao Chengyang team enter the First Division as a champion. At the beginning of 2021, Huang Renjie played on behalf of his brothers team Jinan Yinfeng and won the first China City Chess League championship. At the end of May this year, Huang Renjie defeated various strong players in the "Huayi Cup" 2021 Men's World Chess Championship Division (China Region), ascended to the championship, and successfully entered the World Cup. With many achievements ahead of him, Huang Renjie's victory in the Rookie of the Year Championship is an unexpected surprise and is reasonable."

  4. Xie, Bingxin 解冰昕 (2023-10-24). "黄仁杰夺得中国国际象棋新锐赛冠军" [Huang Renjie wins China Chess Emerging Championship] (in Chinese). Xinhua News Agency. Archived from the original on 2023-11-24. Retrieved 2023-11-24.

     The article notes: "中国国际象棋协会消息，“瑞贝卡杯”2023年第三届中国国际象棋新锐赛23日在南京结束全部九轮争夺，最终黄仁杰夺得冠军，赵晨曦位列第二，奚奇获得季军。"

     From Google Translate: "According to the China Chess Association, the "Rebecca Cup" 2023 Third China Chess Emerging Competition concluded all nine rounds of competition in Nanjing on the 23rd. In the end, Huang Renjie won the championship, Zhao Chenxi ranked second, and Xi Qi won the third place."

  5. Ge, Huizhong 葛会忠 (2023-08-01). "国际象棋世界杯赛黄仁杰轻松晋级" [Huang Renjie easily advanced to the Chess World Cup]. 中国体育报 [China Sports Daily] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2023-11-24. Retrieved 2023-11-24.

     The article notes: "英伦和“00后”小将黄仁杰都需要从首轮打起。不过黄仁杰的对手美国棋手刘宇镇缺席首轮比赛，黄仁杰不战而胜，顺利进入第二轮。"

     From Google Translate: "Both England and the "post-00s" young player Huang Renjie need to start from the first round. However, Huang Renjie's opponent, American chess player Liu Yuzhen, was absent from the first round. Huang Renjie won without a fight and successfully entered the second round."

  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Huang Renjie (simplified Chinese: 黄仁杰; traditional Chinese: 黃仁傑) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

  Cunard (talk) 10:30, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Cunard's sources. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:34, 29 November 2023 (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. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 07:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UNiiQu3[edit]

UNiiQu3 (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 person that does not meet WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG. Not much about the subject to confer notability. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and United States of America. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Not much about the subject to confer notability."

She has released music with Big Freedia, Whipped Cream, Aluna, Anna Lunoe, and more, who are also notable in the electronic music scene. She has been and continues to be covered by Billboard, Forbes, Vice, Complex, The Guardian, and more, all sources which I've provided.

Furthermore, she just opened the Renaissance Tour for Beyonce, and won a BMI award for her contributions to Chloe Bailey's debut single "Have Mercy". She's known for having launched Jersey club music to wider audiences, hence why she is dubbed the "Queen of Jersey club" in the title of most articles written about her. I have been a huge supporter in these electronic music scenes for years, and trust me, she's known; a quick Google search will give you even more thorough insight. I will continue to add all relevant sources.

If you are looking at musician stubs mainly to vote for article removal based on your personal viewpoint, then I'd love for you to provide clearer justification for deletion. Anarkafrica (talk) 13:39, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Likely TOOSOON, only a limited about of coverage [26], [27] and [28], all of which are trivial. Oaktree b (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: In addition to the information I've provided above, she meets the criteria for notability. Particularly for number 1.

  
  

  Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria.

  
  

  1. "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries." Anarkafrica (talk) 14:02, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Here is a list of non-trivial sources [29], [30], [31], and [32]. Anarkafrica (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  All except for the last ref are trivial. Oaktree b (talk) 14:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'll exclude ref 6 because that's a tour mention (I'd included it because of the "non-trivial tour coverage" rule; however, the other sources very clearly point out the artist's background and why she is a notable fixture in the Jersey club music scene. Anarkafrica (talk) 15:07, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Agreed, but they are trivial/minimal length articles. We need extensive coverage of the person. Oaktree b (talk) 15:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Understood. I am finding and adding more sources - please keep checking the article. I've also included her BMI award. Anarkafrica (talk) 15:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  She won a special mention as part of a group of other people, I'm not sure that helps notability. Oaktree b (talk) 13:11, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I work professionally in the music production business. She is not merely being “mentioned” as you put it. She is credited and awarded as a songwtiter on the composition team. Anarkafrica (talk) 18:40, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, as a special mention. That's not notable here I'm afraid. Oaktree b (talk) 00:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Again, being a part of a composition team is not known as a "special mention". You are downplaying her songwriting credibility. Anarkafrica (talk) 00:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It's listed as a special mention in the website itself, she didn't win. Please go read the source. Oaktree b (talk) 15:43, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I do not see the phrase "special mention" written anywhere on the website next to or in relation to her name.[33]

  
  

  If you could kindly provide the specific url which states this, rather than assuming, then I will concede to your point. You also have yet to address the other users who are saying the same things as I am. Rather, you'd prefer to argue over something that we have provided proof for, repeatedly. Anarkafrica (talk) 17:23, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  [34] Oaktree b (talk) 20:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That's the same link I provided and it's not written there.

  I can do you one better, however, where it explicitly says Award and Uniiqu3 is holding an official BMI award that has been awarded to her:

  [35] Anarkafrica (talk) 22:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  As part of a group of people, I'm still not seeing notability, she's one in the long list. Oaktree b (talk) 01:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  "As part of a group of people" Yes, who have all equally been given the same BMI award - which denotes notability in itself, as contributors, some of whom already have Wikipedia articles written about them. Here’s an example of what a special mention from BMI looks like, in case you were wondering:[36], which is completely different from the official award she has received. I even took it upon myself to email BMI.

  I feel like I and others made ourselves very clear as we keep having to assert her notability, but since I’m tired and all the facts are here, I’ll let you have the last word.

  No matter what the reply is to me after this, I feel confident in that all of the facts as per WP:GNG rules have been well presented. Anarkafrica (talk) 02:09, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such as The Guardian here, AllMusic here, Crack (magazine) here, DJ Mag here, Pitchfork review here and others so that WP:GNG is passed in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Precisely. Not only has she been the front page feature on those websites, she has also been mentioned by each of these sources multiple times. I don't see any founded reason to delete her page. Anarkafrica (talk) 18:15, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I agree with other commentators on keep. There are enough recognized sources to view this artist as credible. Juju (talk) 17:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep; as this article is well over the three-source guideline – with very high-quality, independent sources, too! Mover of molehills^{move me} 23:39, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment: There seems to be WP:MEAT activities on this talk page 94rain ^Talk 23:16, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree, but can't prove anything. Oaktree b (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  How did you come to that conclusion? Can you be specific? Djflem (talk) 08:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Do you mean page? There is no talk page for the article or this AFD. Djflem (talk) 08:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  There were continuous comments that were pro-Keep for the article on the Talk page and they all got removed because of being on the wrong discussion page.

  
  

  I only noticed the first few votes and told them to rather add their voices to the AfD discussion here if they wanted to include their viewpoints, but the comments kept flooding the Talk page.

  
  

  This seems to be the reason why they were removed, at least according to the user that deleted them, rather than WP:MEAT. Anarkafrica (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Sources provided satisfy GNG. Djflem (talk) 06:03, 28 November 2023 (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 14:15, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Mohammed Saeed Raza[edit]

Syed Mohammed Saeed Raza (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 poet or writer, no mentions in Books other than being father of Abdul Qavi Desnavi. Just a father of notable person does not make him notable. -- Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 09:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, India, and Bihar. Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 09:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Poetry, and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:56, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -This article's subject are not currently notable or they dont meet's WP:POET & WP:AUTHOR.~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 14:21, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Partial merge to Abdul Qavi Desnavi as WP:ATD, where subject is mentioned. —siroχo 04:07, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly Refer to page 14 of the 1954 edition Magazine St. Xavier's College, Bombay

[37]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ng8nTWw2b_QH3524KdjWklaHuFN9RzB6/view

Kindly Refer to page 14,43 of the 1953 edition Magazine St. Xavier's College, Bombay

[38]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HV75Oa18EosMmsQkNknn7a-oMMXoCtgt/view Bpldxb 10:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Subject does not have too much coverage. Royal88888 (talk) 02:59, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above--Tumbuka Arch (talk) 09:40, 30 November 2023 (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!} 08:11, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Gaur Hari Singhania Institute of Management and Research[edit]

Dr. Gaur Hari Singhania Institute of Management and Research (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)

Promo piece on a non-notable private biz school. Published years ago, but IMO should never have got through AfC (accepted by a since-blocked sock). Cites only primary sources, and BEFORE finds nothing beyond the usual rankings, directory listings, sponsored content and social media. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT by some margin. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Education, and India. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for the reasons stated in the nomination. Also, not only does this article heavily rely on primary sources, it doesn't even use them correctly e.g. the section about collaborations only links to the sites of other institutes, and not even to pages where said supposedly collaborations are confirmed, effectively artificially expanding the sources section.Cortador (talk) 11:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:57, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Relies excessively on primary sources and 25 out of the 26 references are not used properly. HarukaAmaranth ^春_香 19:27, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Not just those e.g. reference 13 claims that the school got an award from the Times Group, but the reference just links to the main page of the Times Group website, not to any subpage about the award. Half the references are like that. Cortador (talk) 20:17, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete based in what I can see in English. Prepared to reconsider if there are good sources in Hindi. Mccapra (talk) 19:47, 23 November 2023 (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!} 08:11, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chitraloka.com[edit]

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

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

The sources are mostly not about the portal. Extremely poor and superficial coverage, delete. Tls9-me (talk) 08:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep. This article [39] is entirely about the website. It may seem to mention the name Chitraloka a few times but ctrl-f Veeresh and the source tells the whole back story behind the website. This website was the only website reporting the full details of the Kidnapping of Rajkumar in 2000 [40]. Also, "the first website to be solely focused on Kannada cinema" gives unique notability. DareshMohan (talk) 08:37, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Strong keep per DareshMohan. This says it was one of only two websites giving frequent news about Kannada cinema in the early 2000s. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:48, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Websites, India, and Karnataka. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete article based on passing mentions and lacking in depth coverage in reliable independent sources. Mccapra (talk) 20:21, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• @Mccapra: I added [41], [42] [43], which were fully about the website and removed the passing mentions. DareshMohan (talk) 02:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping. I’m a bit doubtful about how independent those pieces are but they are much more substantial coverage so I’ll strike my !vote. Mccapra (talk) 09:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep in view of the additional references identified in this discussion that show significant coverage about the website, so that WP:GNG is passed imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:15, 29 November 2023 (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!} 08:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Softengi[edit]

Softengi (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)

Clear promotion, I've already removed not referenced parts with links to PR.com and other not reliable press-releases; the remaining few sources are not reliable and routine. Delete per not WP:NCORP Tls9-me (talk) 08:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing can improve the page, for lack of verifiability Sl67890 (talk) 11:34, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Technology, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:19, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Coverage found in Gnews, for the company, consists of numerous hits, all Forbes Council articles, which are not RS. Delete for lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 14:39, 23 November 2023 (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!} 07:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Advance Design[edit]

Advance Design (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)

Brochure advertising article in the GRAITEC series. See coi report. No indication of being notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 08:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Same deal as Advance Concrete and Advance Steel.Cortador (talk) 11:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Engineering, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails WP:NSOFT. Owen× ☎ 15:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:NPRODUCT which requires "sustained coverage in reliable secondary sources." My searches for this product, as with the other GRAITEC products in this line, did not produce anything meeting that requirement.  Spintendo  02:56, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]