Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Purge

17 October 2024

Read how to nominate an article for deletion.

Purge server cache

Catherine Naglestad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is written like a resume. Both sources used lack independence. One is written by her paid talent management, and the other is an interview from the website of her employer. Not clear the subject meets GNG as the article has zero independent sources with significant coverage. 4meter4 (talk) 15:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Türkiye Top 20 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Although this article is rated highly important for Wikiproject Turkey no one has cited it despite it being tagged for a long time and me asking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Turkey#Articles_without_any_cites_at_all As the talk page complains of false information maybe it should simply be deleted unless anyone is interested in fixing it? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TECO Electric and Machinery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I believe fits the criteria to be deleted for multiple issues - primarily notability based on WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:NOTADVERT. I made an effort to find references and could only find primary sources. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scars to Prove It (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vanessa Grellet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage in secondary, independent sources outside of all the crypto churnalism. Accomplished businesswoman and executive, but there's nothing much of note (awards, research, influence, founding of a company). Mooonswimmer 16:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for your feedback.
I am quite surprised by this outcome, all the sources were found on Google, the most important ones in Google News. And I just found a new source on Forbes: https://www.forbes.fr/technologie/etat-des-lieux-des-nft-au-paris-blockchain-week-summit
Vanessa Grellet has appeared in 3 notable French media: La Tribune, BFM Business, and Le Monde Informatique, as well as in the Wall Street Journal and Forbes. She has also contributed to a paper for the World Economic Forum. I thought that these were notable primary and secondary independent sources. Your help would be appreciated in order to improve the article. Crystalcoin (talk) 21:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Forbes source you linked to has only one mention of Vanessa Grellet. Translated to English:
Between pure speculation and truly disruptive technology, NFTs appeal to a wide range of profiles. The “NFT Panel: How NFT funds are taking advantage of an emerging market” conference presented how NFT funds are approaching this market. Renowned panelists Julien Bouteloup, founder Blackpool Finance, James WO, CEO-founder DFG, Drew Austin, Redbeard Ventures and Vanessa Grellet, Coinfound explained their interest in these technologies.
Although it's a generally reliable source when the articles are written by Forbes staff, that is far from significant coverage, which is necessary to demonstrate the notability of a subject. It's a passing mention. It doesn't develop on why Grellet is a renowned panelist. Do you have any sources covering her or her work in-depth? That's what would help demonstrate that she is indeed notable. We'd need at least two or three sources. Mooonswimmer 22:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thanks for your answer. Vanessa Grellet contributed to a World Economic Forum paper in 2021.
I don't think this organization would have invited her if she wasn't a renowned panelist.
https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Digital_Currency_Governance_Consortium_2021.pdf
She has two other interviews in the main economical medias in France: in La Tribune (https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/banques-finance/les-bourses-traditionnelles-vont-s-interesser-aux-crypto-actifs-et-vice-versa-vanessa-grellet-consensys-817978.html) and a video one at the Paris Blockchain Week with BFM TV (https://www.bfmtv.com/economie/replay-emissions/tech-and-co/vanessa-grellet-coinfund-coinfund-est-un-fonds-d-investissement-specialise-dans-le-web3-12-04_VN-202204120691.html), one of the biggest blockchain events in Europe. Those are not PR for sure, I can agree that the one on Le Monde Informatique looks more like a PR (https://www.lemondeinformatique.fr/actualites/lire-aglae-ventures-va-lancer-un-fonds-de-100-meteuro-dedie-au-web3-87642.html).
She is also mentioned in The Wall Street Journal :
https://www.wsj.com/articles/arche-capital-to-raise-100-million-debut-fund-amid-crypto-comeback-b7713428 Crystalcoin (talk) 09:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:51, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you asilvering,
Vanessa Grellet is an active actor in the sphere of crypto.
She has been interviewed by major economical media and she is an experienced panelist.
You will find in the sources:
- is in the top 100 most influential people in crypto in 2022, Cointelegraph
- has been interviewed by top French economical media: BFM Business and La Tribune
- is top speaker at blockchain conferences: Consensus and Paris Blockchain Week Summit, Forbes
- founded her own company, The Wall Street Journal, after managing the crypto fund of the world's "new" richest man, Financial Times
- co-founded with other S&P 500 companies the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, now a board member
- has collaborated with the World Economic Forum and The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Crystalcoin (talk) 21:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Kindly provide references for the claims and titles held so that they can be assessed for notability and SIGCOV.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 12:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 14:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imago Amor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Living Room Anthology, Vol. 1 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The North Star (album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hope's Not Giving Up (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Light Makes a Way (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magnify (Remedy Drive album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NOTABILITY requirements, specifically WP:NMUSIC; no WP:SIGCOV. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tsestos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged uncited in 2009. I could not find good enough sources to show it to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 14:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noah Kudic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Repeatedly created and declined, fails WP:GNG and not sure that being in a youth league is enough for WP:NSPORT. Theroadislong (talk) 14:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Civilizations in Babylon 5 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

AFD to receive wider input if this needs a stand-alone article. In 2020, this civilization article got smerged into List_of_Babylon_5_characters (as part of a larger B5 cleanup move) for WP:INUNIVERSE and general WP:FANCRUFT problems to avoid AFD (the irony!), see original merge proposal. The article got reestablished today, I would nowadays label it as an undue WP:Content fork without established notability. Should it exist and develop from here (assuming sources even exist), or officially redirect back to List_of_Babylon_5_characters until it qualifies for WP:SPINOUT? – sgeureka tc 13:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or is the main argument a WP:PAGEDECIDE one for a likely notable topic?
The original merge is quite justified in my view, as there were no objections to the proposal then. But I do understand that the lack of treatment of the Shadows is one concern, because I know there are secondary sources talking about them, even though they are neither worked into this article nor the old stand-alone one. I don't have an opinion yet on the merge, but I am against deletion, as I don't see a reason not to at least have the redirect as WP:AtD. I think the old merge discussion should have been continued instead of starting a deletion discussion. Pinging @Anonymous44: as involved editor.
With regard to notability, one first secondary source which has significant treatment on our topic here would be the Babylon 5 chapter of The Essential Science Fiction Television Reader, which discusses the four main "younger races", Shadows and Vorlons. Daranios (talk) 15:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CitizenLab (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:ORG. Has been marked as problematic since 2020. Just summarizes the routine business activities of the company and its main offering. The awards do not contribute to notability as they lack articles themselves. I can't find sources with significant coverage of this company, like its particular influence on citizen engagement. 331dot (talk) 13:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I suggest you look into and are most welcome to integrate in the page:
    • Impact on engagement - all third-party sources where the company had no influence in what was put out:
- https://www.localdigital.gov.uk/case-studies/developing-powerful-tools-to-improve-local-play-park-planning-engagement-and-efficiency/
- https://www.newham.gov.uk/news/article/1202/newham-s-people-powered-places-becomes-a-world-leader-in-participatory-democracy
- https://ircai.org/top100/entry/ai-based-community-engagement-platform-and-analysis-by-citizenlab/
- https://www.peoplepowered.org/news-content/chile-institute-uses-digital-platform-to-engage-youth
- https://www.peoplepowered.org/platform-ratings
The first two sources are primary sources- users of your company's offering. The third seems to be a directory listing with a description. The people powered Chile story might be okay, but that's only one. The rating is not as it's not significant coverage. The company's own reports are primary sources as well. 331dot (talk) 14:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot IRCAI = International Research Centre on Artificial Intelligence (IRCAI) under the auspices of UNESCO, not just some directory listing website :) Sören3300 (talk) 14:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but it's still not significant coverage that contributes to notability. Personally I never heard of IRCAI(not that's it's required I have heard of it) 331dot (talk) 14:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- https://wsa-global.org/wsa-awards/winners/#?year=2019&
- https://etion.be/kennis/aline-muylaert-wietse-van-rans-beeck-winnen-etion-leadership-award
- A former Obama administration official Beth Noveck is Chair of the board: https://www.lecho.be/entreprises/media-marketing/citizenlab-se-renforce-avec-une-ancienne-collaboratrice-d-obama/10241348.html
- one of the leading platforms in the space: https://democracy-technologies.org/participation/citizen-lab-platform/ Sören3300 (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The World Summit Awards have an article, so that works towards contributing towards notability(but the other awards listed should just be removed as they don't have articles). The award the founder received is for the founder, not the company itself. That's still two- we usually look for three with in-depth coverage. 331dot (talk) 14:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I didn't examine if they were press-release type articles. They seem to be interviews. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Priyamvad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to be notable. I'm unable to find any coverage. Fails WP:BIO. --Ratekreel (talk) 13:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nambiar Builders (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NCORP Polygnotus (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corvigo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There doesn't seem to be much coverage of this company outside of trade journals. The NYT article mentions the company a few times but does not address it directly in much if any detail. CNN is one single namedrop. I can't see any way of meeting all four criteria of WP:ORGCRIT with multiple sources, unfortunately. Previously deleted by PROD in 2006. Alpha3031 (tc) 07:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 12:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akhtar Usman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The BLP was created in the main namespace and later draftified by Maliner. The creator then submitted it for review, but later unilaterally moved the BLP back to the main namespace, to avoid AFC review process. So I feel compelled to take this to AFD so the community can decide whether it should remain or be deleted. IMO, it fails both GNG and NAUTHOR, as none of the works are notable enough. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Likely to be contested, so let's get a more firm outcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 12:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Xuemin Lin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As the subject of this page, I respectfully request its removal. Given that Wikipedia allows anyone to edit content without my approval, I have concerns about potential inaccuracies or misrepresentations. Therefore, I prefer that my personal information not be displayed or managed in this way, and I hope this request can be granted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aumuja (talkcontribs) 01:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vexxed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG, article is mostly nonsense Polygnotus (talk) 11:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of royal visits to Worthing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fancruft and WP:OR, does not pass WP:GNG Polygnotus (talk) 10:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Plentifully sourced to reliable books... Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 11:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hassocks5489: But is the topic of those books "all royal visits to Worthing"? Polygnotus (talk) 11:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a whole book, but a whole section in Elleray (1998) is titled ... "Royal Visits". Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 11:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So there is no in-depth sustained significant independent coverage of the topic of the article and it does not meet GNG. Since you have access to the source, can you please look up if the claim I am talking about below is indeed SYNTH or if it is made in the book and post the quote here? Thanks! Polygnotus (talk) 11:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hassocks5489: Sorry, I forgot to ping. Polygnotus (talk) 12:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Royal visits are always well-documented. Every local history will document the royals who arrive, and every action of a specific royal will get documented in court circulars etc., but for a stand-alone list we need specific sources that show Worthing as having a special status as a royal destination, different to, say, Manchester, which has probably also been visited by many royals at many times. The fact that the royals are notable, and that Worthing is notable, doesn't mean that the conjunction of the two is notable. Elemimele (talk) 11:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Worthing Don't think it's notable enough for its own article, but makes sense as part of Worthing's. Bluepotato81 (talk) 11:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Especially since from what I can tell from the article, the visit of Princess Amelia had a significant impact on Worthing's development. I think the list should be deleted or heavily cut, though. Bluepotato81 (talk) 11:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The way its phrased in the article feels very WP:SYNTHy, not sure the source supports that and I am not sure the source is even reliable. The idea that one child spends a couple of months on the coast and that because of that local authorities spent the next ten years developing Worthing as a high-class seaside resort and spa town, with amenities designed to attract fashionable visitors is suspicious. Much more likely that the child was sent to a place that was already a resort/spa and that was later developed into something bigger and better, something that was already happening and would've happened anyway. Polygnotus (talk) 11:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sibylle Eschapasse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is sourced to blogs and the UN's website. As far as I'm aware working for the UN does not form part of any alternative notability criteria and the primary sources cited here don't cover this subject in any significant depth and don't support WP:ANYBIO 𝔓420°𝔓Holla 10:15, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Marketing Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There has been some coverage of this organisation's IPO in Reuters but it's essentially a first-hand account of the event and is therefore a primary source Kaptain Kebab Heart (talk) 09:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Farley (manners expert) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

None of the references provide anything close to in-depth, independent, secondary coverage about Farley. Yes he has appeard on TV and has written for or been quoted in newspapers, but that's not what WP:NBIO calls for. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Korea Life Insurance Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage; I managed to find occasional trivial mentions only. 美しい歌 (talk) 08:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liam Waite (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

His credits don't satisfy WP:NACTOR (a significant role in Ghosts of Mars and 12 episodes of some TV series called Flatland), and he can't inherit notability from his relationship with Natasha Henstridge. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cancelled (podcast) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reliability of sources is questionable, and otherwise unsuitable to be considered SIGCOV. Especially concerning given that this is sufficiently BLP-adjacent that the policy likely binds us. Even worse, the article text actually only bears the barest resemblance to the contents of the nearest footnotes, if even that, and the tone is such that even had we the sources to write a proper article, we may be best to start from scratch. The bluelinked hosts preclude A7, but perhaps G11 should be seriously considered. Alpha3031 (tc) 10:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kwality Wall's (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

doesn't have enough reliable sources to prove that the brand is significant or notable in the ice cream market Slarticlos (talk) 07:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karelian Bobtail (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find any independent sigcov. The mentions I can find are so brief and vague I can't even be sure they've not just simply misspelt Kurilian Bobtail. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not the original editor for this article, I'm the one who added it to the list of cat breeds article. Karelian Bobtails are rare breed and mostly in rural villages. There are a handful of breeders in the Republic and Leningrad Oblast. Breeding is difficult because of the recessive gene. All original information online is in Russian, and a bit in Suvi. If you give me a couple weeks I can perhaps contact some people to see if they have the original research and documents from the 90s. I can't do this immediately though as I have field work for the next couple weeks.
-Red 90.251.92.149 (talk) 13:30, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't dispute the breed exists, just that there is not enough independent secondary coverage for a stand alone article. I do not mind waiting for you to look for sources but if they're original research and primary documents that aren't published they are not useful for Wikipedia. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note I have no opposition to a redirect to List of cat breeds where the subject is also mentioned. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2006 Kawasaki Frontale season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

AFD’ing this because redirecting season articles to the club is not a thing we do, i.e. the redirect is not useful. The page was rightfully prodded by ViridianPenguin and Spiderone, as the page failed WP:NOTSTATS; a season page that barely had some information entered, no lead etc, so no reason to preserve the page history either. The creator is blocked indefinitely. Geschichte (talk) 07:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Masayoshi Takayanagi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Huge failure of WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. Played a couple of football matches. No usable sources in ja:wiki, is it apparent for everyone that they are exclusively WP:PRIMARY (or too short, as #1). Creator is globally locked. Geschichte (talk) 07:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Kame (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Never played in Albania’s highest league, continued for a couple years in the semi-pro second tier. I did not find a single usable source in a WP:BEFORE. Geschichte (talk) 08:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Jet Rescue Air Ambulance Learjet 35 crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:EVENT: not notable under WP:EVENTCRIT #4, no WP:LASTING effects, no WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:15, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of Mozilla Thunderbird (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Significant violations of WP:NOTCHANGELOG, and I have reason to believe it also violates WP:UNDUE due to the article's documenting of all versions of Thunderbird, including every single beta version. Without the table, there is not enough content to justify the article's existence, at least currently. It also has longstanding issues, including a lack of reliable, high-quality, secondary sources as almost every single source is just a link to Mozilla's own release notes, which is in incredibly heavy primary source territory. I feel like so much focus has been put on filling out the table that it has been to the detriment of the article as a whole. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 07:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Public Health Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

lacks enough reliable information showing that it is important or significant Slarticlos (talk) 07:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:48, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mazhanoolkkanavu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

PROD removed with statement "Google/English language websearch is not good for Malayalam culture". If that is the case, why is it that Google Malayalam also yields nothing [5]. Changing the year parameter to today yields an unrelated music video of a similar name. Please find a review or two before keeping this. DareshMohan (talk) 06:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 06:28, 10 October 2024 (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! 06:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dogspot (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:NSUSTAINED Brief bursts of news coverage may not sufficiently demonstrate notability. The coverage is centered on it receiving some investment from a notable Indian businessman in 2016. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. — hako9 (talk) 06:17, 10 October 2024 (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! 06:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Research on tornadoes in 2024 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a niche topic that fails WP:N and is likely WP:LISTCRUFT. Nothing is inherently notable about routine tornado research that requires a Wikipedia article to be written about it. United States Man (talk) 05:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least I would support a merge into History of tornado research#2024. Procyon117 (talk) 16:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There are very different opinions on what should happen with this article and its content so I'm giving this discussion more time in hopes of achieving a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moriah Aviation Training Centre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG. 3 sources are distance calculators or google maps. The 5th source is its own website. Lacking third party coverage. LibStar (talk) 05:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stanford Super Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

Not enoungh coverage on independent sources, Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 03:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Stanford Super Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

same reason as well. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 03:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it had it's own sub-category on The Guardian with 134 pages, plenty on Cricinfo, Cricbuzz and lengthy piece in Wisden. As it only ran for one year there may be an argument to merge the 2008 article into the main article. JP (Talk) 08:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do agree with the coverage for the parent article, but the 2008 one should be merged. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 08:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Jpeeling, merge 2008 into it. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Egyptian bus accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks sustained coverage and had no lasting effects. Just a WP:News article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 03:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's a horrific thing to contemplate that a road accident killing 55 anywhere in the world wouldn't be notable. We've got little to go on, there are news reports but little ongoing coverage. That said, I don't read Arabic, it seems likely that there would be sustained non-English coverage. I'm going to say unsure in that I would hope that there was more than I'm seeing. JMWt (talk) 09:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
List of Rainbow Rumble episodes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Problematic list article. An English Wikipedia article should not be an indiscriminate list of episodes that have no lasting impact; as per one editor in this discussion thread I started regarding this list article, there are no dynamic narratives for episodes of game shows that can satisfy a separate article (game shows somehow fall under the WP:ROUTINE category of TV programming). On top of that, much of the sources used for this article are WP:NIS (like ABS-CBN Entertainment) and WP:SOCIALMEDIA (like Instagram, see WP:RSPINSTAGRAM).

List may also lean towards WP:FANCRUFT as the episodes overview section, with very-detailed info on the highest winning bracket of each contestant more fit on Philippine showbiz fandom websites than English Wikipedia. In short, unlikely encyclopedic in nature.

At the very least, it can be merged with Rainbow Rumble#Episodes but focusing on salient details: episode date, team name, contestants (in an inline enumerated list, not a bulleted, vertical list that unnecessarily consumes article page height), and the episode winner. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Borgenland (talk) 03:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. We've had more than enough cringy fancruft here that needs abridging if not excising. Blake Gripling (talk) 04:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lavangsdalen bus accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks sustained coverage and had no lasting effects. Just a WP:News article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merger.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Era, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another Indiana rail-spot/post-office with nothing there. Not a notable place. Mangoe (talk) 02:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liz Neeley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Neeley is an accomplished woman but is not encyclopedically notable. There isn't much secondary coverage of her nor she does not pass WP:NACADEMIC. Mooonswimmer 01:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Entertainment, Science, Maryland, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch 02:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. I see little sign of NPROF, with only one highly cited paper that is also very highly coauthored. I am skeptical of GNG -- the NPR piece is somewhat substantial, but the other pieces are either primary (usually authored by the subject) or else do not mention her. The book has gotten some reviews, but these do not list her as an author [33][34]. I considered a redirect to the Story Collider, but as she has moved on from that organization, that doesn't seem to make so much sense. I think this is probably a bit WP:TOOSOON. Watchlisting in case I have missed something. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:50, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Is this the same person: [35]. a citation factor of 10 or 11 doesn't seem that high, but I'm unsure. Oaktree b (talk) 15:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep: Might pass AUTHOR, with some book reviews for "Escape from the Ivory Tower", [36], [37], [38]. Oaktree b (talk) 15:31, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But all three of those say that the book is by Nancy Baron, and do not mention Neeley. Baron does thank Neeley in the acknowledgements (alongside a lot of other folks). Russ Woodroofe (talk) 16:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I just came to the same conclusion that she did not write the book (and reverted myself when I added one review to Neeley's article) DaffodilOcean (talk) 16:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep There are at least four sources I found in the article for WP:GNG. I'm listing them up here for ease of access. The first one has the most coverage of the subject; the other three are more than just passing mention but less than significant coverage. Nnev66 (talk) 20:59, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    1. "Your Brain On Storytelling : Short Wave". NPR.org. January 14, 2020.
    2. Wilcox, Christie; Brookshire, Bethany; Goldman, Jason G (2016). Science blogging: the essential guide. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0300197556. OCLC 920017519.
    3. Achenbach, Joel (2023-04-09). "Opinion | Why science is so hard to believe". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. ProQuest 1655455709.
    4. Renken, Elena (11 April 2020). "How Stories Connect And Persuade Us: Unleashing The Brain Power Of Narrative". NPR.org.
  • Delete. Coverage by the subject themselves, as in the NPR interviews, is not independent or secondary, so does not count towards GNG. She is one of the authors of the science blogging guide so that is not an independent reference either. The WP article has no encyclopedic coverage of her, just quotes and an anecdote about her dad that would be UNDUE. These are not substantial enough for NPROF C7 and definitely not for GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 23:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I agree with @Nnev66 that she has just enough NPR articles/podcasts for WP:GNG. I think the Short Wave podcast would be enough. Bpuddin (talk) 06:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Men Who Lost China (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to the recently deleted article on The World Without US by the same filmmaker, no signs of significant coverage. The article's current sourcing is not independent or significant, and I could not find any signs of further coverage after an online search (given that the film has less than 100,000 views on YouTube, I doubt that coverage exists). RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

China's Century of Humiliation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to the recently deleted article on The World Without US by the same filmmaker, no signs of significant coverage. The article's current sourcing is not independent or significant, and the best I found from a Google search is a forum review, which is not significant. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Jones (physicist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Massive conflict of interest issues with a good amount of the edits coming from the subject of the article himself. Some of the sources appear to be dead. Any other sources don't even mention him, focusing more on the actual companies he claimed to have some involvement in. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 01:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd back in 2007 so not eligible for Soft Deletion. I'll just add that I don't see obvious signs that the subject edited this article and would be interested in knowing how the nominator came to this conclusion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:14, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz Subject goes by @Complexica TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 05:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
Tasjil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. No significant coverage. References only give a paragraph or so mentioning something similar, but only one uses the translation of tasjil. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 01:04, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 02:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed no coverage in most all reliable sources. Very obscure term.Smkolins (talk) 06:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I strongly oppose as the creator. In contrast to the nominator's claim, there are three sources in the article that specifically use the word "Tasjil" (Amanat 2009, Naficy 2011 and Pirnazar 2019) and all of them are scholarly. The book Historical Dictionary of the Bahá'í Faith has an entry for the process under the title 'DECLARATION OF BELIEF OR ACCEPTANCE' (translating the word "Tasjil" to Acceptance) and another reliable source (Neusner 2003) dedicates almost two full pages to a detailed description of its stages (titled 'Who is considered a Baháʼí?'), while a certain case in Africa, Samuel Kima of Cameroon, is mentioned in several pages of an academic book published by the renowned Brill Publishers (Lee 2011). These are only a handful of sources and I believe this is a proof that this topic is notable. Khánum Gül (talk) 13:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please note that there is a bahaipedia entry for this topic as well. Khánum Gül (talk) 15:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see WP:GNG and WP:DICTIONARY. One problem is that you created the title in Arabic for a process that is not known in English by its Arabic name. The content is probably most suited for Baháʼí teaching plans#Baháʼí terminology with a section on "Declaration" or similar. Both of the other sections (Pioneering and Entry by troops) previously has their own articles and were consolidated into that page. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 16:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your first objection concerns naming, which is not the focus of this discussion. I have no issue with a title like "Baháʼí Enrollment Process" (or something similar) and a mention of its name in the original scripture of the faith, "Tasjil," in the article's lead. However, I still disagree with your assertion that this topic is not notable, as it has been significantly covered by multiple academic sources in great detail. I have added another source (van den Hoonaard 1996), which provides an extensive discussion of the practice in Canada, examining various cases. Khánum Gül (talk) 08:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. SInce we have a difference of opinion here on the outcome of this AFD, a source review would be helpful to a closer.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Katongole-Mbidde (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. 1 of the 2 supplied sources is primary. Could not find significant coverage of this individual. LibStar (talk) 01:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Centre FORA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable organization. BEFORE search leads to nothing, failing GNG and NORG. Klinetalkcontribs 00:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Felo Barkere (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

there's nothing that mentions Felo Barkere and Baunez Ridge together that isn't Eric Gilbertson related/sourced. This location doesn't appear to meet WP:NGEO. Graywalls (talk) 00:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles like Bikku Bitti have used peakbagger and summitpost blogs as a source, so what's the difference with this article? Any highest point of a sovereign nation should have its article on Wikipedia or at least be mentioned. KnowledgeIsPower9281 (talk) 11:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes people like Eric or Ginge are the only source of information on peaks like this. Allowing one highpointer's firsthand information (like Ginge on Bikku Bitti) but not allowing Eric's on Felo Barkere seems strange and inconsistent by WP policy. Also, peakbagger has extensively been used as a source for minor mountains (which Felo Barkere would fall under), so what is the sudden change against this? Also, peaks promoted to the main database on peakbagger are looked over and verified by administrators, so some "child sitting on his dad's shoulder" won't be messing up the measurement by 5-6 feet on a peak in the main database as much of the data comes from professionally done surveys. KnowledgeIsPower9281 (talk) 11:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herman Basudde