Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

14 March 2025

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< March 13	March 15 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Lists of countries with people on postage stamps

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

IMO fails WP:NLIST, not to say pointless: each and every country has people on their stamps. --Altenmann >talk 20:47, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:49, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of people on the postage stamps of Sudan

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

Fails Wikipedia:NLIST. See similar discussion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people on the postage stamps of Israel --Altenmann >talk 20:40, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Sudan. Shellwood (talk) 20:48, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Religious affiliations of prime ministers of the Netherlands

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

Just like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of prime ministers of the Netherlands by education, this list does not meet WP:NLIST Dajasj (talk) 19:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Dajasj (talk) 19:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday is Dead

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

Doesn't meet WP:NSONG, lacking significant coverage by reliable sources. Frost 19:20, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:48, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comparative gendarmerie enlisted ranks of Francophone countries

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

Unclear why this comparison would be a notable topic (plus WP:NOTGALLERY). Fram (talk) 18:03, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and France. Fram (talk) 18:03, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete Incomprehensible and basically unreferenced (I mean comparison is unreferenced). --Altenmann >talk 20:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kgomotso Balotthanyi

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

Declined prod. The added [1] source is really scraping the barrel for notability. It's a computer game database and not SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. In addition, NEXIST argument doesn't work when decent sources can't be found. LibStar (talk) 13:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Botswana. LibStar (talk) 13:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on WP:NEXIST. NEXIST works even when decent sources aren't linked in the article, so long as it can be demonstrated that sources exist. I am curious about the nominator's interpretation of that guideline, which isn't stated anywhere in P&G.

See for example recent nominations WP:Articles for deletion/Joaquim Ferreira (athlete), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adalberto García, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chae Hong-nak, etc. Balotthanyi and the forementioned athletes all have similar levels of coverage, but the only difference is the availability of Botswanan media in the 1980s on the Internet. In the near future, those archives might be made accessible and we can add the coverage to the article. --Habst (talk) 15:36, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Balotthanyi and the forementioned athletes all have similar levels of coverage'. Now that is blatantly a falsehood, now you're making things up to argue keep. Athlete articles that have been kept have solid sources. LibStar (talk) 15:40, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar, it's not false at all. Balotthanyi was one of the only Olympians from Botswana and based on the WP:Verifiable information we do have, his achievements demonstrate that coverage exists just as it did for Ferreire, Garcia, and Chae. Just because the articles aren't available on the internet and we can't find any via a web search doesn't mean that physical coverage shouldn't be considered. --Habst (talk) 16:10, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only verifiable info you found was from a computer game database. LibStar (talk) 16:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of falsehoods, that's not true at all. There's lot of WP:V information on the subject at WP:Tilastopaja ([2]), by Bill Mallon ([3]), World Athletics ([4]), etc. All of these databases are independently compiled meaning there were other sources for the information. --Habst (talk) 18:43, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now that is blatantly a falsehood – how do you know he doesn't have any coverage in the Botswanan media? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:39, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do random African countries like Botswana even have physical newspaper archives? What if the papers just got thrown out, or lost to fire or war or something? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiOriginal-9, they have a national archives: https://www.gov.bw/culture/national-archives-research-enquiry Mass physical media tends to stick around. If the papers were thrown out, let's find a source saying that instead of assuming that it can't exist. --Habst (talk) 18:39, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Athletics at the 1984 Summer Olympics – Men's 1500 metres where Balotthanyi's ninth place finish in a preliminary heat (13 seconds behind the heat winner) is recorded. A stand-alone article can't be supported here because there is a complete failure to satisfy WP:SPORTBASIC, prong 5, which mandates: "All sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources." (Emphasis added.) Cbl62 (talk) 02:17, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather talk about the substance than get bogged down in P&G discussion, but see WP:Articles for deletion/Mabel Saeluzika#c-Habst-20250308213100-Cbl62-20250308155700 for an explanation of why NEXIST is still valid from a P&G perspective. --Habst (talk) 21:44, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, no concrete reason to think that there "must" be sources. I share the opinion that Habst publishes many questionable statements. Geschichte (talk) 14:00, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Geschichte, you know I have a lot of respect for your contributions so I want to know what statements you're referring to. If there's a policy disagreement please air it here. --Habst (talk) 00:58, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I closed this earlier today as "redirect" given the consensus that has developed and the lack of support for the "keep" !voter's NEXIST argument. (See my rationale here.) However, after a talk page request from Habst, I am self-reverting -- not because I believe the close was erroneous but because my personal commitment is to self-revert any non-admin close, if I receive a good-faith request to do so, and leave it for an admin to handle. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I was just going to close as Redirect but since DClemens' was just contentious, let's give it more time here
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 17:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Our Lady of the Most Holy Rosary Academy

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

Fails WP:GNG. This is an unsourced article with a single line saying it exists. The only source I've found (disclaimer: I'm not very good at it) is a Facebook page for the school. Bbb23 (talk) 17:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 18:18, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Delony

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

There is no substantive RS coverage of the subject. The subject authored a "Wall Street Journal best-seller" but I'm not sure what that is and whether that meets WP:AUTHOR notability. The page was created by an editor who is creating lots of promotional pages for figures related to Dave Ramsey. Thenightaway (talk) 17:47, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 18:17, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Coleman (radio host)

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

There is no substantive RS coverage of the subject. The subject authored a "Wall Street Journal best-seller" but I'm not sure what that is and whether that meets WP:AUTHOR notability. The page was created by an editor who is creating lots of promotional pages for figures related to Dave Ramsey. Thenightaway (talk) 17:45, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Tennessee. Shellwood (talk) 18:16, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

George Kamel

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

There is no substantive RS coverage of the subject. There is nothing to indicate that they are notable. The page was created by an editor who is creating lots of promotional pages for figures related to Dave Ramsey. Thenightaway (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, and Massachusetts. Shellwood (talk) 18:15, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Michigan vs. Ohio State football game

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

Just another edition of the Michigan–Ohio State college football rivalry series; no WP:LASTING significance to set it apart from any other typical meeting between Michigan and Ohio State, and there is no indication that the game deserves a standalone article. The sources and information cited in the article all point to WP:ROUTINE coverage from what I can see. Similar situation to this 2024 rivalry meeting and this 2024 game which ended in an upset, both of which were deleted at AfD late last year. Any information specific to this game can be merged to Michigan–Ohio State football rivalry, 2024 Michigan Wolverines football team, or 2024 Ohio State Buckeyes football team if necessary. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:27, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, American football, Michigan, and Ohio. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Completely WP:ROTM other than the fight, which can be discussed in full at Michigan–Ohio State football rivalry. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:40, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Comment the following was added to my nomination statement by the author of the article (User:RockCrusher6), unsigned; I have removed it and displayed it here as written: This was a significant game of the 2024 season, and other significant upsets of the season, such as [Alabama vs. Vanderbilt football game|Alabama-Vanderbilt], have their own articles. This article details not just the game but the resulting fight, which was very significant at the time. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @RockCrusher6: in response to your comment, please note that the sole fact that the Bama–Vandy page exists is not grounds to keep this article (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  PCN02WPS, you cited the deletion of two similar articles (2024 Texas vs. Texas A&M football game, 2024 Northern Illinois vs. Notre Dame football game) in your nomination. So, it seems only fair to counter with similar examples that haven't been deleted (2024 Alabama vs. Vanderbilt football game). "WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS" is often (usually?) a terrible invocation, and ought to be trumped by the principle of parallelism. We want to consistent, equal treatment of analogous things on Wikipedia. Specifically, here, we want to draw a consistent line around these stand-alone articles for college football games. Maybe the 2024 Bama–Vandy game is such more historically significant than this game. But we should assess that, not dismiss the comparison. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:06, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Michigan–Ohio State football rivalry#Michigan winning streak (2021–2024) is the place to summarize this meeting of rivals, as well as 2024 Ohio State Buckeyes football team#vs Michigan (rivalry) and 2024 Michigan Wolverines football team#at No. 2 Ohio State (rivalry). Regardless that the team with the worse (but still winning) record beat the team with the better record, there's no need for a standalone article for a routine game here. Reywas92^Talk 17:42, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, or redirect/merge into the rivalry page and the 2024 season pages for both teams. There is no lasting effects of the fight (a quick google search showed the only mentions being in the week after the game, and retrospectives on the Buckeyes season after the national championship game hardly mention the fight), and the game itself was pretty routine in the rivalry. Esb5415 (talk) (C) 18:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' or redirect per nom. Cbl62 (talk) 20:05, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Nepal Premier League

AfDs for this article:

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

Just WP:ROUTINE and WP:NOTINHERITED coverage; fails WP:SIGCOV. Vestrian24Bio 04:21, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Cricket, and Nepal. Vestrian24Bio 04:21, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural comment: When making a 2nd nomination less than 4 months after the previous closed, you are obliged to comment on the previous discussion and why it should be revisited. Geschichte (talk) 09:40, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Geschichte
1. Previous AfD was a no consensus close.
2. It was closed because the tournament was to be inaugurated and it was unclear if it would get WP:SIGCOV.
3. But, now it concluded about 3 months ago and it did not attain WP:SIGCOV.
Vestrian24Bio 07:53, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The last AfD was a procedural close because the tournament had not yet happened, but was happening soon. Now it has happened, we can assess the notability appropriately. The last AfD closure even says that a new AfD after the event has happened is fine. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete still not enough significant sustained coverage of the event to pass WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep An event which has never occurred before cannot be labelled routine. Passes the GNG, multiple in depth reliable sources analysing its implact: Nepal Premier League becomes a watershed for Nepali cricket Kathmandu Post 23 December 2004, Beyond Nepal Premier League: The Role of Cricket in Revitalizing Nepali Economy Nepal Economic Forum 9 December 2024, First edition of NPL takes Nepali cricket a few notches up, internationally República 21 December 2024. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:40, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An event which has never occurred before cannot be labelled routine This is simply untrue- please read WP:ROUTINE. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:16, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have. A national level sporting competition which has never occurred before cannot be called routine. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 00:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where is the sustained WP:Significant coverage that is required to meet WP:GNG? I see a lot of routine coverage and regurgitated press releases (which most of your links above are). Joseph2302 (talk) 08:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If we start assuming having this much coverage is not enough then we should start nominating every full member domestic tournament article or should not create any articles of domestic tournament since they also have not enough coverage and some countries article are created with just routine coverage think of that too.Godknowme1 (talk) 06:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Godknowme1: Nepal isn't a full member nation. Vestrian24Bio 07:49, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I never told Nepal is full member nation, my point is every full member country domestic tournament lacks significant coverage yet we create separate articles need to rethink what is reliable and what is routine.Godknowme1 (talk) 10:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do a news search for 2024 NPL and 2024 IPL and see the difference... Vestrian24Bio 05:00, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we start comparing others leagues with IPL no need for Afds just delete it, my point was even domestics cricket tournament of full members lacks coverage yet we make article and there is no problem having this much coverage should be sufficient.Godknowme1 (talk) 01:25, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input please
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 17:30, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DRASTIC

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Drastic Team

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

A previous discussion had resulted in a Merge, this has now been challenged. Over a year ago.

It is a small group that seems to have no independent notability outside of the lab leak theory (which this was merged with) and which has too little, information to really warrant its own page Slatersteven (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Slatersteven (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: COVID-19 and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:25, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG. This was the previous discussion. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 17:26, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – This online activist group passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines due to focused, extensive, and sustained coverage in reliable sources such as CNET, The Hindu, and the recent Le Monde article I added to the page. This article details the group's activities and influence on the COVID-19 origin debate, especially its efforts to uncover key documents and promote awareness around the lab leak theory as plausible. DRASTIC's leaking of the DEFUSE proposal from a source in DARPA, significantly changed the tone and discourse around the lab leak theory, prompting responses from the US government, Chinese state media, and the WHO. 103.156.74.129 (talk) 17:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC) — 103.156.74.129 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Added previous AFD, which closed as keep, when it was under a different title. Skynxnex (talk) 18:40, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to COVID-19 lab leak theory Not every minor aspect of the COVID-19 pandemic warrants a standalone article. This grouped gained some media attention in 2021, but this was not WP:SUSTAINED. Standalone articles require more than just brief bursts of coverage spanning a few months. This group's activites are already discussed in the lab-leak article. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Shibbolethink: @JPxG:, two users active in the recent merge discussion. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manitoba Marlins

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

I found no other secondary sources that establishes WP:ORG, this article also only has a source to their own website. Not notable club. Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 17:02, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Canada. Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 17:02, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:25, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Augustine George

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

Prodded by ToadetteEdit, deprodded by IP editor with comment "Kind Request to keep the page. Its very important." The only plausible pass of WP:NPROF that I see is a potential WP:NPROF C6 case, but I am doubtful that the college comprises a major academic institution. Is it a suborganization of Bengaluru North University? Bringing to AfD for clarity. I am a weak delete. Redirection to the college could potentially be a reasonable alternative to deletion. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 16:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to be straightforward. When I originally prodded the article, I saw that the subject doesn't meet the notability given that their research contributions are not widely cited and the sources are mostly primary. But then I am in doubt whether Kristu Jayanti College is a major institution or not, given that it was rated A++ by a governmental body and is affiliated with a major university. I am split between keeping and deleting but am not opposed to redirection. I will reconsider if someone provides proof whether the institute is major or not; otherwise, I will default to weak delete. ToadetteEdit (talk) 17:02, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Christianity, Computing, Karnataka, and Tamil Nadu. Skynxnex (talk) 17:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I tend towards weak keep. Kristu Jayanti College offers 17 or so master's degrees in a number of different subjects; this is no community college. If it were a Ph.D.-granting institution, it would be a "keep" from me. The article needs improvement - by which I mean it needs to be pared down substantially so that it has no CV-like sections. Qflib (talk) 19:42, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yuba–Sutter Regional Arts Council

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

No obvious ATD since it supports both Yuba County and Sutter. No org level coverage so we're here. Star Mississippi 16:24, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Organizations, and California. Star Mississippi 16:24, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zalman Tech Co.

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

Nonnotable business --Altenmann >talk 16:11, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and South Korea. Skynxnex (talk) 17:11, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Command Secondary Schools

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

This bloated article is a hugely embellished list of schools which fail WP:NSCHOOL with few references. Rather than an article it's a brochure, and a potential WP:COATRACK. Fails WP:GNG and is WP:ADMASQ 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:11, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Business, Education, Schools, and Nigeria. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:11, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taku Morinaga

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

Hasn't played since 2019, fails GNG RossEvans19 (talk) 16:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 16:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:09, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Other than the The Straits Times article (which is already in the article), here's what I found,
- Gekisaka,
- Yahoo News,
- Yahoo Sports (though I doubt this has WP:SIGCOV but seems like it)
- Yahoo News
- Gekisaka
- Gekisaka

It's hard looking for the guy as Takuro Morinaga has the same character as him. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 06:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 07:26, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep – Per the sources presented by Miminity. It's enough for a stub. Svartner (talk) 07:21, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 15:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Nive Nulls

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

No or not enough indication of notability, most if not all sources are user-generated content or related material, article seems to be written in a slightly promotional tone. RaschenTechner (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. RaschenTechner (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet, Kansas, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:26, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fani Stathopoulou

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

No evidence of notability. C F A 15:30, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Greece. Shellwood (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Goldie and Wendy

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

No reception/analysis, brief commentary on who played them in the film. Fails WP:GNG. At best, can be redirected to List of Sin City characters. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:33, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:33, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Sin City yarns

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

Unreferenced plot summary. Unlikely term to be searched for. I don't see the need to redirect this. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NLIST. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:30, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Comics and animation, and Lists. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:30, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Breech clout

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

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This page only contains information on the word's usage, with only a brief description of what it is. loserhead 14:07, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, History, Fashion, Canada, and United States of America. Skynxnex (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disc2Phone

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

Nothing in the article or in my query suggests this meets WP:NSOFT or WP:GNG. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:47, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:47, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:27, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Faisal Al-Mahmeed

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

Declined prod with reasons sources exist in Arabic. The additional Arabic source added is a 1 line mention and not SIGCOV. Please provide in depth sources as article is based on databases including 1 line mention in canoe.ca source. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 13:42, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Kuwait. LibStar (talk) 13:42, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OSL Consulting

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Article was previously nominated and deleted before. Current version still lacks independent in-depth sources and requirements are even more stringent now. Imcdc Contact 12:01, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, and United Kingdom. Imcdc Contact 12:01, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Management, Engineering, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:48, 28 February 2025 (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 12:23, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article about a company, created a couple of months after the previous instance was deleted. Looking at Companies House, the earlier Optimus Services Ltd which is mentioned in the article text went into administration in 2021 [5]; OSL Consulting Engineers Ltd was set up in 2020 [6]. The present article is largely a brochure about the firm's engagement in two projects; I agree with the late DGG's assessment in the 2013 AfD. A firm going about its business, but lacking evidence of attained notability in their own right. OSL appear to have been acquired recently by Nexos Solutions [7] but there is no article on that firm which could provide a WP:ATD. AllyD (talk) 09:04, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:36, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hermann Feierabend

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

No sources found. Fails WP:GNG and only 20 revisions done since its creation. Gauravs 51 (talk) 13:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 13:35, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parbat Herbal Co

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

The subject does not pass WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. No WP:RS found. Taabii (talk) 13:05, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, and India. Taabii (talk) 13:05, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NCORP, as on WP:BEFORE I didn’t found any reliable source on this company. It may be created for promotional purposes TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:56, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Medicine, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lekha Prajapati

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability has not improved significantly since the last AfD, with only five or six reliable sources covering it, some of which provide only trivial mentions. It fails WP:NACTOR. Dam222 🌋 (talk) 12:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and India. Shellwood (talk) 13:33, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. -Mushy Yank. 15:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per WP:NACTOR, The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. But she wasn’t in lead in any notable movie which are listed in her filmography thus fails WP:NACTOR TheSlumPanda (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No opinion on the article but please note that NACTOR does not require lead role(s), only significant roles (which includes lead roles, evidently). -Mushy Yank. 18:57, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zachary David

AfDs for this article:

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

This article has been deleted before as the subject doesn’t meet WP:GNG. The subject has done nothing in the meantime that makes the subject meet that threshold now. He doesn’t meet the relevant SNG. T v x1 19:48, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Motorsport. T v x1 19:48, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (article creator). I never read the old version of the article, but from my understanding of the AfD, it was very sloppeley. The current state of the article meets WP:GNG, as it has three reliable, independent, and reliable sources: Reference 3 [8] Reference 8 [9], Reference 10 [10], and Reference 11 [11]. Further, Reference 2 [12] and Reference 4 [13] are both independent and reliable, but are simply announcements. I would be willing to elaborate or clarify if needed. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
References 8 and 10 are WP:ROUTINE coverage and Reference 11 is scant at best. I have, however, found these: [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]. Seems that coming from two obscure (racing) countries is of great help for SIGCOV. MSport1005 (talk) 21:04, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I probably wouldn't of been able to find these myself. Implementing some of them now. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 21:40, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 20:08, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning delete - While a reasonable number of sources do seem to exist, they essentially seem to fall under WP:ONEEVENT, namely "being a junior level racing driver from the Philippines who races under a Maltese licence". As always with these teenage sub-F3-level drivers my stance remains unchanged that what sources there are about them would be better used to flesh out the articles about the season(s) they have competed in, and we should have exceedingly high notability standards for WP:BLPs of WP:MINORS. If this driver wins the FRECA or Super Formula Lights title then the situation may change within the next year, so draftifying the article could be preferable as an WP:AtD, but generally I am not convinced that a driver at this level can ever be considered notable unless it is for reasons outside of motorsport. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 20:22, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Under my interpretation, WP:ONEEVENT does not apply here. Sure, he has an increased chance of receiving significant coverage due to his nationalit(ies), but that does not mean he is only notable for one event (as the policy intends). He has received coverage about his participation in various series, from karting, to F4, to FRECA; not his participation in one specific event.

Further, what would you consider "exceedingly high notability standards"? WP:MINORS does not set out specific standards for Minor BLPs as a whole, but primarily discusses controversial/contentious statements.

While I do understand your opinion about sub-F3 driver articles, I see no reason for titles or specific achievements should be taken into account providing that the article meets GNG. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 20:44, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I think the article can do better if it was draftified as per the commentator above Codonified (talk) 00:08, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - ABS-CBN is an excellent source, but I'm not sure about the others. He's just barely there. Bearian (talk) 02:18, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The source in the article are reliable, and credible. There are source that valid from the team itself, the racing series he raced, motorsport news, and national news. Some may not familiar because they are not involve in the motorsport scene to know if the source is credible. But rest assured the article source are valid. Thfeeder (talk) 04:36, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Validity of the sources is not the issue here.T v x1 06:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then there's no problem then. Why you want a speedy deletion on a driver which already have enough reliable source, racing in credible known racing series? The article in the past was deleted because there was not enough source and too young to be establish. But as of now he is. Thfeeder (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because there was a consensus that he isn’t notable enough and such consensus should not be ignored. That he passes now is nothing but your personal opinion. He finished in a meaningless position in Formula Regional. That’s nowhere near notable. T v x1 22:01, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Every year there's a new influx of young drivers who enter these junior formulae. Some of them will go onto stardom and many more will fade into obscurity, but unless there's sustained coverage of their involvement in F1 team's junior programmes (see Arvid Lindblad for a current example), most of the coverage of them is either WP:ROUTINE mentions in what is actually coverage of the series they compete in, or sources which are fairly WP:PROMOTIONAL in nature and generally do more to indicate that a driver has a good publicist than they indicate any actual claim to notability. The issue from a Wikipedia editor's perspective is twofold: First, WP:BLPs of children are a potential ethical minefield and should really only be created in cases where the individual's notability is unquestionable. Wikipedia should not become some gossip site dedicated to disseminating information about random teenagers who happen to have participated in fifth-tier sporting events. Secondly, the large-scale creation of these articles about obscure individuals who may-or-may-not become more noteworthy in the future leaves a trail of WP:BLPs behind that need to be constantly monitored for vandalism and other-such issues. Ultimately, being WP:FAMOUS isn't necessarily a good thing, and preventing defamation from being spread about people who aren't really public figures (yet, at least) usually means that we should avoid having articles about people who aren't public figures. There's also the issue of editors attention being directed to the wrong places. Often the articles about these young drivers receive a disproportionate amount of initial effort from editors who try to fit any reference that mentions them into the article in an attempt to demonstrate supposed notability, when in reality that effort would be far better directed towards editting the articles about the seasons they have competed in, which are often noticeably underdeveloped. This is where WP:ONEEVENT becomes relevant. While these young drivers may not literally be notable for just one single event, they still generally lack notability independent of the few events they have competed in. Having separate articles about them tends to come across to me as more of an attempt to create a database than it does a meaningful expansion of said underdeveloped articles. In this case we see a driver who is certainly teetering on the edge of notability, and if this was an article about a type of animal or a building or a person who lived hundreds of years ago, then I would say the subject meets the WP:GNG, but personally I think much higher standards of notability have to be applied to WP:BLPs of seventeen year olds. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 22:14, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Being a BLP, it would be helpful to see a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:25, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the sources identified by MSport1005 are enough to pass WP:GNG in my opinion. I disagree with HumanBodyPiloter5's assertion that the subject is notable for WP:ONEEVENT - these sources cover more than that. I also disagree with the WP:MINOR argument, which will soon become moot anyway, since the subject is already 17 years old.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:40, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger Lin

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

No evidence of notability. Appears to be a middle-ranking Chinese businessman. The subject doesn't have any significant coverage in reliable sources, the pages currently used only mention him in passing or use him as one of many sources for quotes on a more important topic. The Chinese language source, similarly, is a video interview (so not counting for notability purposes) where the subject seems to be giving his views on aspects of the belt and road.--Boynamedsue (talk) 09:34, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and China. Shellwood (talk) 13:36, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of S&box games

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

See WP:NLIST. I'm not sure this really needs a separate article from S&box at this point and some content could easily be merged, such as the first-party activities. Lot of very heavy WP:PRIMARY sourcing relied upon to provide content on the games. Other than some minor coverage for Team Fortress: Source 2, the games don't seem independently notable, which definitely raises the onus on whether the category as a whole satisfies WP:NLIST. Given there's no secondary sourcing provided about the games as a whole, I'm inclined to say this isn't. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 09:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 09:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect per nom. Only third-party game that might have some sigcov is Team Fortress: Source 2. IgelRM (talk) 16:49, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:29, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of nicknames of prime ministers of India

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

Fails WP:GNG, not notable enough, more than half of the list is empty and lack significant in-depth coverage in the news. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 09:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 14. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:42, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and India. Shellwood (talk) 13:36, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:29, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arrest of Thiago José Silva Barboza de Paula

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

Pure WP:BLPCRIME violation, person not otherwise notable and only accused, not convicted. Fram (talk) 09:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Brazil. Fram (talk) 09:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Terrorism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:30, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No relevant repercussions about what happened, and also no encyclopedic content. Svartner (talk) 18:58, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Bustamante

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

Unreliable sources dominate the article sourcing. Attempt to move it to draft was aborted because a copy of it already exist in the draft space Ednabrenze (talk) 09:04, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America. Ednabrenze (talk) 09:04, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:ANYBIO. This reads like a personal resume. — Maile (talk) 12:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Radio, Television, Military, and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
CU note I've deleted this under WP:CSD#G5 after blocking the creator for socking.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:01, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Debby Kerner & Ernie Rettino

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

This is unreferenced, sole footnote is broken. Not seeing how this duo meets WP:NBIO. There is a chance they meet NBIO individually (for example, Ernie Rettino had a Grammy nom? [20]). But the duo, under the name given in the article, does not appear to be notable (no GS/GB hits, just Google - and concerns about WP:CITOGENESIS are an issue). Is it even official? Did they have a band under that name? Article does not make this clear...). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:53, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:32, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Celon Pharma

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

An article on a pharmaceuticals company, sourced to their own site. The article makes bold claims, of the benefits of their new drug "for curing schizophrenia"; I can see a Reuters report, but that is essentially the company founder predicting a great future. Other than that, searches find stock price discussions and announcements about other drugs,falling under WP:CORPTRIV. Clearly a company going about its business (in a sector where caution is needed about repeating predictive claims), but I am not seeing the coverage of the company itself needed to demonstrate attained notability. AllyD (talk) 08:39, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, and Poland. AllyD (talk) 08:39, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no evidence of notability. Additionally, the list of "developed drugs" is misleading; they are all generics. I₂Overcome ^talk 11:08, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - once I got rid of the promotional fluff in the article, it doesn't have anything left that reveals notability to fulfill WP:CORP. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 13:21, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nissan Diesel Space Runner RA

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

No references found. Promotional tone found. Gauravs 51 (talk) 08:18, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can only find photos and fan sites about this particular bus model. Article is now unsourced, so nothing to help show notability. Lack of sourcing Oaktree b (talk) 14:36, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Transportation, and Japan. Skynxnex (talk) 14:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lokad

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Well, nothing much to say, article is entirely sourced to its on website. It was G11 deleted in 2015 but brought it here for more assessment of its currently notability standing perhaps there are sources somewhere which I failed to find Ednabrenze (talk) 08:16, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and France. Ednabrenze (talk) 08:16, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. Blatant advertising from the ceo. duffbeerforme (talk) 08:33, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Hard disagree. Yes, I happen to be the CEO, but the tone is neutral. A "Criticisms and Controversies" has been added. None of the other wikipedia pages discussing supply chain software companies has anything like that. This page already exceeds the standards that Wikipedia uphold for the quasi-totality of enterprise software companies. Joannes Vermorel (talk) 09:56, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- IMHO, the content of this webpage can hardly be considered as "blatant adversiting". It is not hostile to the company and it mentions the specifics of the company but all Wikipedia pages about companies are similar in that regard. The reasoning according to which a Wiki page which presents a company in a favourable light should be deleted would lead to the deletion of essentially all pages about companies. This end result is disproportionate. It would also lead to another unfurtonaute consequence: people would only access the websites of companies, which are 100% promotional. Therefore, instead of deleting the webpage, I recommended a discussion about its content, if necessary. 109.190.36.117 (talk) 11:57, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Lokad is a major player in the supply chain optimization space, and as such it makes sense to have it on wikipedia even if, of course, one could consider it has an advertising effect for the company. But removing company pages based on this principle would lead to the deletion of most, if not all, company pages on wikipedia. I would approve the deletion if the page was explicitely displaying unproved marketing claims (like "provides the most powerful and efficient algorithm"), but the page as it is is just providing factual information about what they do, so I would not describe it as a "blatant advertising". Atchmoom (talk) 12:35, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the page to include more non-Lokad sources. I have also introduce two sections to clarify the significance of the entry - beyond the corporate trivia (aka basic facts about Lokad). Joannes Vermorel (talk) 12:57, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Applying overly strict criteria for company pages could unintentionally lead to removing many valuable and informative entries from Wikipedia. Perhaps it's more beneficial to focus on improving content quality rather than deletion? NB: As a Tech Advisor and Head of ML & Innovation, I consistently recommend Lokad's resources for inventory optimization and supply chain management projects in the DACH region. Wikipedia article is a good start. "Criticisms and Controversies" help to provide a balanced perspective on the topic from the start. Abdullin Rinat (talk) 13:29, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a professor, director of the MSc programme at the Polytechnic University of Porto, Portugal, and resercher in the field of Supply Chain Science, I consider the open dissemination of advanced and innovative technical content to be of the utmost importance for universities and society in general. Typically, innovative technology companies do not have this facet of contributing to the dissemination of technical knowledge through channels of universal access and high quality scientific content. Lokad's contribution to science and society through the dissemination of relevant and innovative technical content deserves the highest recognition. Its wikipedia page has been extremely useful as a reference for the academic community of technical-scientific excellence and service to society. In order to avoid the loss that would result from deleting the page, I recommend that, if you think something should be changed, you request those changes, which I'm sure will be in line with LOKAD's spirit and values. Thank you. MJPLopes (talk) 15:03, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand why this page is marked for deletion. Lokad is one of the few commercially successful AI startups in Europe. At a time when the general public largely equates AI with chatbots, highlighting companies that use AI to run operations (Lokad for supply chain optimization, the only other that comes to mind is aiomatic for predictive maintenance) is really important.
I myself run an AI optimization startup in the US (insideopt.com) and I know how much work is needed to educate the public that modern computer science allows us to bring efficiency to a world that is battling with uncertainty and limited resources. Lokad is a company that helps make our supply chains more resilient and avoid reduce unnecessary transportation and wasted products.
In my humble opinion, it fits Wikis mission to let the public know that these capabilities exist and exist as commercial offerings and not just in theory as research projects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meinolf71 (talk • contribs) 10:47, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Atchmoom, Abdullin Rinat, MJPLopes, Meinolf71, you're all arguing that Lokad is such a terrific thing/company/resource, and some of you are using your resume to support that opinion, but none of you are showing us the secondary sourcing, the in-depth reporting, the published assessments and evaluations that will prove that this is notable by our standards. Someone's opinion of how valuable something is is just not relevant here: what matters is if the subject meets, for instance, WP:NCORP. That is the only thing a closing administrator looks for. Drmies (talk) 16:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - The Lokad page is arguably better than TradeGecko, TXT e-solutions, John Galt Solutions, Openbravo. Unlike all those companies, there are some notable contributions and technological achievements associated with Lokad (listed on the page). In particular the result at the M5 competition warrants - on its own - an inclusion. Joannes Vermorel (talk) 17:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - It's arguably worse then [list worse articles here]. That's not relevant. Drmies (talk) 17:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Drmies, You reverted my change on Demand Sensing. This topic is one of the most absurd case of intellectual fraud in the last decade in supply chain. Just ask any supply chain professor... According to you, the role of wikipedia to embrace whatever nonsense random vendors are pushing? (Yes, they are my competitors, but it's still nonsense and fraud nonetheless) Joannes Vermorel (talk) 17:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Btw, insideopt.com has impressive contributions of its own. They are basically the one company that offers a stochastic (optimization) solver. Joannes Vermorel (talk) 11:32, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
fully agree with this statement. Lokad releases regularly discussions around their main area of expertise in Supply Chains and does tremendous work to educate the supply chain community around different approaches, strategies, theories and use cases. I bel ve that it fits the education mission of Wikipedia 197.18.182.181 (talk) 14:31, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ponyo, I have to ask a favor in such an obvious case--but could you? Drmies (talk) 15:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies:, from the technical data, if there is a connection between the accounts, it would be of the coordinated variety.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:15, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could we even try to attempt at assessing the merits and demerits of the actual Lokad page? I argue it is already better than the quasi-totality of the pages listing enterprise software vendors, especially when it comes to supply chain. Joannes Vermorel (talk) 16:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vermorel, no one has done that except the nominator. And when almost half a dozen brand-new editors show up, out of nowhere, all making the same argument, well. On top of that, we have an editor who makes edits like this one but claims they're not advertising. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some of those editors are quite well-known among supply chain circles - and they have nothing to do with Lokad: not clients, not (ex)employees, not contractors. As far I am concerned, I do have an obvious tie with Lokad (quite explicit though). Joannes Vermorel (talk) 17:31, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have listed some of the PhD thesis of Lokad. Please note that those PhDs have been validated by independent institutions, those materials are peer-reviewed. Joannes Vermorel (talk) 20:16, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any valid reason why deletion is posited as justifiable here - as noted, the edit has "nothing much to say"? A legitimate company that Wikipedia users may wish to research and find links to do more research. If this is not valid, then why is it valid to have pages discussing the likes of Blue Yonder or Oracle or any other commercial software or supply chain entity? All that is needed to make it more "valid" is the time for others to contribute to the page - as noted on the page itself presumably by editor(s). It if is taken down there will be no means for it to be further developed and enhanced by the broader Wiki user community and thereby benefit Wiki users seeking to expand their knowledge of supply chain technology. Ian Wright Iangbusa (talk) 17:08, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Iangbusa: The nominator, Ednabrenze, clearly said the thing was sourced only to its own website and that they could not find any other coverage. So if you want to counter that, it's actually really simple: show them the proper coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources. Surely Oracle Corporation has that sourcing; I just looked, and there are over 200 references, many of the secondary. Everything else is really just irrelevant, including "may wish to research", which is a version of "but it's useful"--see WP:ITSIMPORTANT. Drmies (talk) 17:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Oracle is a mega-corporation, one of the largest software company worldwide, and one of the oldest as well. This is an insane bar to met.
  
  The Lokad pages has several PhD listed, which are peer-reviewed by independent research institutions. Looking at the other wiki pages from comparable supply chain software vendors, none of that is present. The Lokad page is already above the standards met by those other wiki pages. Joannes Vermorel (talk) 20:19, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tibrewal

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

This article’s incredible articulation outguesses the dependency on self-intoned topicality, while most of the content unreasonably snips the orated extroversion WP:Oral. Remember, there are still distended verses without any cosplayed notable referencing WP:OR Sailedwarrior (talk) 07:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, and India. Sailedwarrior (talk) 07:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:33, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abbas Vali

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

Lack of notability Shkuru Afshar (talk) 07:18, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Iran. Shellwood (talk) 13:33, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. From a brief search there seem to be more than enough reviews of his books to satisfy WP:NAUTHOR. Reviews of Pre-Capitalist Iran: A Theoretical History: [21] [22] [23]. Reviews of Kurds and the State in Iran: The Making of Kurdish Identity: [24] [25] [26]. Reviews of Kurdish Nationalism in Iran: The Forgotten Years (1947-1979): [27] [28]. MCE89 (talk) 15:18, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:33, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Public image of Eminem

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

I don't see evidence in the sourcing (or anywhere that I look) that "public image of Eminem" is an independently notable topic from Eminem ꧁Zanahary꧂ 07:08, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there are separate public image articles for other notable musicians. It appears this article was created to reduce the excessive length of the main Eminem article. I₂Overcome ^talk 11:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Eminem's article is currently having a tag for being too long. I can confirm that Public image of Eminem was created specifically to recude the length of the main article. Now I'm not an expert in Eminem, so anyone can feel free to add more necessary information but it's obvious that we can't keep all of that information in Eminem's article. Hubert555 (talk) 12:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this split is desirable per WP:LENGTH of the main article. When an article is too large, consider breaking it into smaller articles, spinning part of it out into a new article. Full disclosure: I was the editor who added the too long tag to the main article. Isaidnoway (talk) 14:20, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Popular culture. Skynxnex (talk) 14:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Ju-na

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

Fails WP:SINGER. None of her releases have charted, been certified, or received awards. Most of the articles that mention her are about her relationship with Kim Soo-hyun. Smiski (talk) 05:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and South Korea. Smiski (talk) 05:14, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I suppose there would be more in Korean sources, this was all I could find [29], [30]. The Korean wiki article only has links to social media, so no help with sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 14:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abdisalam Aato

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

The WP:BIO of this article does not meet notability guidelines due to a lack of WP:N coverage in independent, WP:RS. QalasQalas (talk) 05:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bibliographies, Film, and Somalia. QalasQalas (talk) 05:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Georgia (U.S. state), and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:46, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Subject doesn't pass notability guidelines. I was unable to find reliable sources on the subject. Yolandagonzales (talk) 15:48, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:10, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recoil (1998 film)

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

Was PROD’d for lack of general notability and WP:NFILM; an IP editor removed the PROD tag with the edit summary “Gary Daniels and Robin Curtis…” so now we go to AfD. The only mention I could find beyond the usual churn of IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes was a blog called Unknown Movies which does not cut the mustard in my opinion. Kazamzam (talk) 04:26, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Kazamzam (talk) 04:26, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Usually movies are easy. There are huge "movie guide" books with casts, productions, and potted summaries, and "DVD guides" and so forth. But this one appears to have escaped inclusion in any books that I can find. Uncle G (talk) 06:11, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: added things. A redirect to the director was warranted anyway and a PROD certainly not appropriate. Meets WP:NFILM. -Mushy Yank. 10:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 10:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Three of the references you added were to WordPress blogs and have been removed. I disagree that the sources provided show the sufficient coverage to establish notability per this language from the guidelines: “Examples of coverage insufficient to fully establish notability include newspaper listings of screening times and venues, "capsule reviews", plot summaries without critical commentary, or listings in comprehensive film guides.” (emphasis added) Kazamzam (talk) 11:19, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(the 2 sources hosted by WP have been removed but were used only to verify the film was called a B-movie). For the rest, PRECISELY, the OTHER sources I added in the Reception section are reliable and include "critical commentary"!!!!! And that's pretty obvious. -Mushy Yank. 11:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mushy Yank - the other reference used was to a publication by Books on Demand which is generally not considered reliable or suitable to establish notability. Also removed. The references you included from TV Spielfilm and Filmdienst fall under the category of a capsule review ("a relatively short critique of a specified creative work") and Schnittberichte seems to be another blog. So I disagree that these are reliable or that they establish notability per the WP:NFILM criteria. Kazamzam (talk) 14:37, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even without the material you judged appropriate to remove during an AfD you yourself initiated (and that was, again, not used to establish notability but for verification, in an attempt to improve the page), I still think that we have enough with the 3 sources. Of course, Filmdienst is reliable, for example. If others think a Redirect is better, I also mentioned that possibility. Opposed to deletion. I have no further comment. -Mushy Yank. 14:46, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Kiser

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

Non notable singer. No notable productions. Claims multiple awards but none are major, most from Country Gospel Music Association, clearly not major. Claimed Emmy is regional. Sourced with primary sources and listings and like much of the OPs work uses fake info in the references. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:35, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Christianity, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marlana VanHoose

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

Non notable singer. No notable productions. Multiple awards but none are major, most from AMG, a "professional artists relations and protection firm" who "handle her career". Bombarded with sources which many having fake authors, fake titles like much of the OPs work. Only decent source is the CBS news feel good piece. Not enough for GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:32, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Christianity, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024–25 Jay Trophy

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. Vestrian24Bio 04:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Cricket, and Nepal. Vestrian24Bio 04:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Have coverage in regional languages and reliable sources can be in any language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Godknowme1 (talk • contribs) 06:40, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not on Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Vestrian24Bio 07:56, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:24, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No case has been made why the existing sources are insufficient.

Cortador (talk) 06:20, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Finnish mountaineers who have conquered eight-thousanders

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

This list and fails WP:NLIST and WP:NOR. There is precisely one source (the Finnish Alpine Club's list of Finns who have climbed 8000 m peaks, which itself cites en-wiki and fi-wiki as sources), and the page admits up top that it has been updated via the page creator's primary source research. The other sources are a mix of off-topic sources ("general information on each mountain" that is WP:UNDUE here) and unreliable/primary sources like SummitPost. This subject fails WP:NLIST because the only source that discusses these mountaineers as a group is the Finnish Alpine Club, which is a membership group not independent of Finnish mountaineers. And it fails WP:CROSSCAT as a non-encyclopedic cross-categorization. Contested draftification. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:19, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Finland. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:19, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, non-notable people, unencyclopedic cross-categorization. Reywas92^Talk 02:32, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per all of the above. Madeleine (talk) 02:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grand City Properties

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

Part of a series of articles created by User:Hilit.schenkel who is now blocked for advertising. Article was disputed for PROD by a WP:SPA. Article is heavily promotional in breach of WP:SPAM even after so many edits and will have to be redone to comply with wiki policy. In addition listed companies are expected to be but not inherently notable. Current sourcing of company to fulfill WP:NCORP is quite weak especially for a listed company. Imcdc Contact 03:00, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Europe, and Luxembourg. Imcdc Contact 03:00, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The page - article content was changed to maintain a neutral and informative voice. Please do not delete it. Danielwish (talk) 08:43, 7 March 2025 (UTC) SPA user has few edits outside of the article up for deletion and its owner.[reply]
Please disclose your relation to Grand City Properties if you have any. Imcdc Contact 08:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I work for Aroundtown SA. Aroundtown invests in commercial and residential real estate which benefits from strong fundamentals and growth prospects. Aroundtown invests in residential real estate through its subsidiary Grand City Properties S.A. ("GCP")

https://www.aroundtown.de/company Danielwish (talk) 21:01, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:COI, please do not make any further direct edits to Grand City Properties and familiarize yourself with the policy. Imcdc Contact 01:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 20:30, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unlike Aroundtown SA, I don't have any more patience to assist paid editors (especially those who originally did not disclose). The page is TNT worthy and I already performed HEY on one of them. ~~I would suggest merging this into Aroundtown SA (a SINGLE paragraph that simply states who they are and what they do - no advertorial language).~~ --CNMall41 (talk) 06:29, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: In this discussion is a suggestion to Merge this article into Aroundtown SA. Any opinions on this option?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:56, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why a merger with Aroundtown SA is being considered. These are different companies, publicly listed under different symbols, and holding different types of assets—commercial vs. residential real estate. @CNMall41 did a great job salvaging Aroundtown SA. I'll do some research over the weekend and will try to salvage this one as well. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Hightex (talk) 16:31, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, SPA. I went ahead a struck that comment. Sticking with delete instead. Thank you for pointing that out. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amare Ferrell

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

I am struggling to find sufficient in-depth coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG. There are two pieces from the same author from The Herald-Times (1, 2), which counts as one solid source. However, most other coverage approaching SIGCOV is relegated to team-specific blogs written by non-notable sportswriters (Indiana Hoosiers on SI, HoosierHuddle, TheHoosier.com, etc.). This author, for example, has only ever written for Indiana Hoosiers on SI and The Hoosier Network since recently graduating from college. JTtheOG (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, Florida, and Indiana. JTtheOG (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. In addition to the Herald-Times SIGCOV linked by JT (part 1/part 2), my searches turned up this (part 1/part 2). Cbl62 (talk) 05:02, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Second set of sources gives just enough for a weak keep, with the ones listed in the first bolded point, I think we have enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:46, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Snake in the Garden

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

Per WP:NEPISODE. There is nothing beyond a summary. And googling the topic reveals one independent review and some review aggregators, which is not enough for notability. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 02:30, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. PlotinusEnjoyer (talk) 02:30, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I did find some additional independent recaps of the episode [31][32] as well as an interview w/ some cast sort of rooted-ish in the episode's reveals [33]. I also found it mentioned briefly in a few books [34][35], but despite this I think we still fall short of WP:NEPISODE here per "The scope of reviews should extend beyond recaps" and given that the scholarly sources are just mentions. The AV club source in the article is the most substantial coverage I can find, and I think we would need at least one more WP:RS w/ significant analysis (beyond a recap) to justify a standalone article. Zzz plant (talk) 05:08, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is sufficient coverage such as avclub.com and douxreviews.com, inquiriesjournal, chicagotribune.com, washingtonian.com, Entertainment Weekly etc. Drushrush (talk) 17:55, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm fairly certain doux reviews is user generated and there for unrelaible Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:41, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the reviews found by Drushrush while they seem pretty routine I would say that most TV episodes from that time would be notable. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:41, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:28, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 Deleted under WP:CSD#G5 as created by abusive sockpuppet of User:Bmusique99; long term abuse‎. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:22, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B Major (South african Producer)

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

I considered leaving put this incarnation of an article that has been speedy-deleted and AFDed many, many times, in conjunction with blocks on a litany of sockpuppets. The difference this time is that a number of sources were new and a few, at first glance, looked substantial. But then they fell apart on further inspection, and notability still appears not to have been reached.

After I removed all the "refs" that were really download links, for all the individual songs listed, that originally appeared in the article, I'm left with six. Here's my assessment of them.

"Major hit in the making: Mitchells Plain muso drops new album". www.dailyvoice.co.za. Retrieved 13 March 2025. I'm puzzled that this is in Spanish on a Spanish website. Nevertheless, it's a brief article of some substance. Yet, the site describes itself as "Un medio para la libertad de información: Free Press Info es un sitio web especializado en la difusión de información periodística, publicidad y marketing por Internet; en defensa de la libertad de expresión" ("A medium for the free dissemination of information: Free Press Info is a web site specializing in the publication of journalistic information, publicity, and marketing via the Internet ...". I'm reading this as "self-published article".
Kujjo, Keji (7 December 2021). "Tuesday Interviews: B Major". Gazeti. Archived from the original on 12 February 2023. Retrieved 14 March 2025. It's an interview.
Grootboom, Jamal. "YoungstaCPT responds to claims that '1000 Mistakes' music composition was stolen". www.iol.co.za. Retrieved 13 March 2025. This is the one source of the six that I've seen before. It's really about YoungstaCPT; I don't feel it conveys any sense of Martin's significance.
Esack, Fuad (28 February 2024). "Martin's Matters of the Heart is Mitchell's Plain Bjorn and bred". Plainsman. Retrieved 12 March 2025. Most of this is just quoting Martin, and the publication, the Plainsman, is local to a single district of Cape Town, Mitchells Plains, where Martin is from. The footer of the page tells us that its distribution area is defined by two shopping districts ("This long established popular community title includes the key shopping centres the Promenade Mall and Town Centre Shopping Centre within its distribution area."). So it's a local-boy profile.
Brooks, Anthony Davidson (22 July 2024). "B Major SA: South African Music Producer Gains Acclaim with Award Nomination at Cape Town Artist Awards". Hype Music. Retrieved 13 March 2025. This article looks promising, especially if the publisher is, as the masthead claims, "South Africa's No. 1 Hip Hop Magazine".
Dean, Marsha (2 August 2023). "Major hit in the making: Mitchells Plain muso drops new album". www.dailyvoice.co.za. Retrieved 13 March 2025. The publisher looks OK but it looks like a PR insertion as it begins "Mitchells Plain music producer and composer Bjorn Martin, aka B Major, is thrilled to announce" and consists mostly of quotes by him.

To me, that leaves the Brooks article as the only one with merit. I'm not finding anything further via Google.

Additional information added after my nomination

Previous deletion discussions:

Now I'm reminded that the Free Press Info citation has been considered before: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B Major (South African musician) Largoplazo (talk) 01:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and South Africa. Largoplazo (talk) 01:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

@Largoplazo Thank you for reviewing the article. I’d like to clarify a few points regarding notability and the reliability of sources:

Notability (WP:MUSICBIO & WP:GNG)

B Major SA meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for musicians (WP:MUSICBIO) as he has:

A best-selling song on notable music service Qobuz (Another Life).

A Cape Town Artist Awards nomination, an independent industry recognition.

Coverage in multiple independent sources.

Reliable Sources (WP:RS)

Hype Music: Describes itself as “South Africa’s No. 1 Hip Hop Magazine,” making it a strong industry source.

IOL & Daily Voice: These are established South African media outlets that frequently cover the country’s music scene. IOL, in particular, is widely recognized as a reliable source.

Plainsman: While local, still it is an independent publication with editorial oversight, making it a valid secondary source.

Gazeti Interview: While interviews alone are not enough for notability, they supplement coverage rather than define it.

The fact that multiple sources independently covered his achievements suggests he is notable within the South African music industry.

If there were past deletions, this version of the article contains substantially improved sourcing and meets notability requirements better than previous iterations.

I respectfully request that the article not be deleted and instead be improved if necessary. JoshuaDello (talk) 06:31, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"IOL & Daily Voice: These are established South African media outlets that frequently cover the country’s music scene. IOL, in particular, is widely recognized as a reliable source." even though the article isn't about him it qualifies for facts. The fact that B Major does exist and his real name is Bjorn Martin from Cape town. Its Coming from a high quality trusted source. Daily Voice writes in different styles even Afrikaans mixed with English so the writing might not always look professional but all writing and publishing is done by editorial oversight and they are qualified journalists who often writes about the South African entertainment and music industry. JoshuaDello (talk) 06:37, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FreePressInfo although is an overseas media outlet has written about Bjorn, proving that his presence and art is reaching places beyond Cape town, before adding Freepressinfo as a source i did research to see if the outlet had any editorial oversight. which is does as it publishes many news stories a day im sure that a media outlet wont just publish something without editorial oversight. this includes all the publications used in this article. The one thing which make these 6 sources strong enough to keep article is their editorial oversight. It is secondary from the subject and should be treated as such no matter how it was written. it is also not an Paid Advertise or articles as most articles will have a banner or text saying the article was paid for.. this is natural coverage over the years please pay attention to dates as well. JoshuaDello (talk) 06:45, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please agree to disagree that the subject is covered enough to either forge a stub article as time suggests that the subject is relevant in this time and age meaning more likely to accomplish greater things in the industry. As the information is taken from different news oulets to create one story is substantial enough for the subject to warrant a stand alone "start article" or "stub article".

kind regards

Josh D. JoshuaDello (talk) 07:12, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i did research to see if the outlet had any editorial oversight. which is does as it publishes many news stories a day im sure that a media outlet wont just publish something without editorial oversight. First you said you did research and ascertained that it has editorial oversight, but then you reasoned that it must have editorial oversite because of a premise that you're sure of. This suggests to me that you haven't actually ascertained it, you've only concluded it. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B Major (South African musician), where Hammersoft noted Looking at freepressinfo.com and scanning the current articles in each section...every single one of them is written by the guy who founded the site. It's effectively a self published source. If you've ascertained it, could you supply the source for that information? A lack of editorial oversight doesn't limit the number of stories that can be printed each day.

Unfortunately, you haven't said anything that alleviates any of the concerns I expressed. I covered my consideration of the 021 Awards in the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B Major (record producer). Hammersoft assessed the Daily Voice: The Daily Voice, as a source to support notability of this person, has been used many times in the past without success. Largoplazo (talk) 13:10, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You provided one citation for the Qobuz claim. I deleted it because it doesn't say anything about it being a best-selling song, or about its ratings at all, and because it was just a music download page. Largoplazo (talk) 16:07, 14 March 2025 (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.

Chakma martial arts

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

This (likely LLM-generated) article is based on entirely hallucinated or fabricated citations. They simply don't exist, none of them. No search results come back for these text strings. Examples: There is no book called Indigenous Peoples of Bangladesh by an R. Ahmed from Dhaka University Press. The International Journal of Cultural Studies published volume 13 in 2010, not volume 16, and no article by this title appears in its archives. Archive.org has never once recorded a site at chakmaheritage.org. I was hesitant to file an A11 or a G4 since I think some admins might be reluctant to delete something with purported sources, but anyone who looks closely will see this is plainly made up. The only source Google turns up for this topic is a university webpage that does not cover the topic but only serves up advertising spam. The subject obviously fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTHOAX. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Martial arts and Bangladesh. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:HOAX. The South Asian Martial Arts Review, really...? Madeleine (talk) 02:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above discussion. Please also do check Chakma history and Chakma Kingdom created by the same user, either needs to be rephrased/merged/deleted. Imwin567 (talk) 03:07, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Imwin567 At least some of the sources on Chakma history are real. Chakma Kingdom is LONG and I'm guessing has mostly fabricated sources, but I don't have time right now to BEFORE that topic. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:12, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthias Hollwich

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

Nonnotable architect. --Altenmann >talk 01:37, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Architecture, Germany, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

International Masters League

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

WP:NOTINHERITED; Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio 16:07, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Cricket. Vestrian24Bio 16:07, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: I see no reason why this page shouldn't exist. It has notable sources to back it up and notable players are playing in it. With each new season, it will get more established. OCDD (talk) 10:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTINHERITED. Vestrian24Bio 11:14, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article should remain, as it holds information about a league 120.61.138.120 (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:35, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep It's trivially easy to find coverage directly about this tournament. I've added a few sources with this edit. There's more out there. OsFish (talk) 05:58, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by trivially - is it WP:TRIVIAL? Vestrian24Bio 11:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean that it took so little difficulty to find good sources that I am curious why the person nominating the article for deletion didn’t try to improve the article instead.OsFish (talk) 16:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rebekah Higgs

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

Doesn't look very notable, and the few citations are mostly dead or commercial. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Television, Internet, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:24, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bernardo Elonga

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

Declined prod with 2 sources added. Whilst third party sources are welcome neither this or this one line mention is SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT or WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 00:34, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Africa. LibStar (talk) 00:34, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read the entirety of the magazine source? BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:36, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please provide a link to it? LibStar (talk) 00:39, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You link it in the nomination? BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:42, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]