Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today

Purge
Shortcut WP:AFD/T

6 April 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

< April 05	April 07 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Matthew Evans (Australian politician)

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

Subject fails WP:NPOL for not occupying any notable political office, and WP:GNG for not having sufficient sources that satisfy WP:IRS and covers them substantially. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Australia. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Kissinger

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

Subject does not appear to meet WP:SPORTSBASIC, with the current sources either being databases or primary to the teams he played or coached. Let'srun (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Football, and Ohio. Let'srun (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grok (web framework)

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

Lacks WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS. Sources provided are primary or blog sites and I was unable to find any other reliable sources. Not to be confused with the other Grok by Twitter/X. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 18:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 18:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was instrumental to the creation of Grok the web framework so I'm not an unbiased source; in this day and age I would not feel comfortable editing a wikipedia page about it anymore. We're talking about a web framework that had minor but global attention but has had little attention for a long time.

There is actually a published book about Grok:

https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/grok-10-web-development-9781847197498

https://www.amazon.com/Grok-1-0-Development-Carlos-Guardia/dp/1847197485

At some point Grok technology was part of the Plone project:

https://4.docs.plone.org/appendices/five-grok/background/what-is-grok-and-five-grok.html

It's not a surprise most of the stuff you could find is in blog sites; this was a web framework conceived during the heyday of blogging and a lot of the primary evidence it had some significance and users in multiple countries is through blog entries. So in the rest I will attempt to show that there was a little global community that used Grok and talked about it. I'm from the Netherlands myself, gave conference talks at least in Germany as far as I can recall.

The author of the Grok book, Carlos de la Guardia, is from Mexico.

Here's a company in Lithuania that still has a page up offering Grok consulting services:

http://www.nous.lt/consulting.html

Here's a conference talk recording (with terrible audio) about Grok at a Pycon conference in the US:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF77e2TeeQo

Here's a talk held in Argentina about it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVbFujCBHjg

Here's a random youtube video mentioning Grok:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h17HFEwhz80

A US developer at Georgia tech:

And here are some blog entries:

https://rhodesmill.org/brandon/2007/my-november-grok-presentation/

A US developer reports on a developer in Brazil (now the author of "Fluent Python") using it:

https://www.nateaune.com/kirbi-a-peer-to-peer-library-built-with-grok/

Here's someone blogging in French about it:

https://www.boureliou.com/2009/grok-1-0-released/

Here's a presentation in Japanese that mentions Grok:

http://plone.jp/event-report/opendocs/osw2009-zope

Here's the website of a company in Germany who talk about a Grok meetup:

https://www.acsr.de/archive/der-grok-neanderthal-sprint-im-rheinland/

So it was notable enough to have a small global community of people who used it and talked about t, but it was also a relatively small community. Martijn Faassen (talk) 19:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also found this paper which discusses Grok:

"Leveraging Convention over Configuration for

Static Analysis in Dynamic Languages"

https://dave.coffee/assets/GreHack-2012-Leveraging_Convention_over_Configuration_for_Static_Analysis_in_Dynamic_Languages.pdf Martijn Faassen (talk) 19:27, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did a google book search and there are actually quite a few books that mention Grok:

Professional Plone 4 Development by Martin Aspeli, 2011

Pro Python System Administration by Rytis Sileika, 2014

Python for Unix and Linux System Administration by Noah Gift, ‎Jeremy M. Jones, 2008

Plone 3 Products Development Cookbook by Juan Pablo Giménez, 2010

Foundations of Python Network Programming by John Goerzen, ‎Tim Bower, ‎Brandon Rhodes, 2011

Mastering Python Design Patterns by Sakis Kasampalis, 2015

Python: Master the Art of Design Patterns by Dusty Phillips, ‎Chetan Giridhar, ‎Sakis Kasampalis, 2016

Enterprise Android: Programming Android Database Applications for the Enterprise

By Zigurd Mednieks, G. Blake Meike, Laird Dornin, Zane Pan, 2013

Even an article on Dutch history by J.W.J. Burgers – Rik Hoekstra The registers of the counts of Holland, 1316–1345: a digital edition in G. Vogeler (Hrsg.): Digitale Diplomatik

/ Buchrezensionen mentions Grok in a technology credit.

Oh, and Fluent Python by Luciano Ramalho, a very popular book about Python, mentions Grok:

Fluent Python: Clear, Concise, and Effective Programming - Page xxiii Martijn Faassen (talk) 19:55, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some papers that discuss Grok in some detail:

Worth, David, and Justin Collins. "Leveraging Convention over Configuration for Static Analysis in Dynamic Languages." G 2 reHack 012: 27.

Cerjak, Jure. Razvoj spletnih aplikacij s platformo Zope. Diss. Univerza v Ljubljani, 2010.

Lederer, Dominique. "zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades” Master of Science in Engineering”/” Diplomingenieur (FH)”."

Foglia Ardila, Andrés Felipe. "Comparación del desarrollo de un aplicativo web entre los lenguajes de programación Python y Java." (2014).

There are plenty of other papers that mention Grok as a Python web framework in a more throwaway way, but that still establishes some level of notability. A good way to filter papers for this specific Grok is to look for "grok zope" or "grok python" (the former works better than the latter). Martijn Faassen (talk) 22:56, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can only find links about Elon's version of Grok. I'm not sure what's given for sourcing is enough. Oaktree b (talk) 19:42, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Zope#Grok which should be slightly expanded with material from this article. This would make the Zope article a bit more robust, match other Zope redirects listed in Category:Python_(programming_language)_web_frameworks, and not break any external links pointing to this article. Mike Linksvayer (talk) 19:01, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:44, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jacky Chou

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

Doesn't meet Wikipedia:Notability or Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Several sources are paid content farms or passing mentions and most were published in the month before the page was published. Page has been speedy deleted before by Deepfriedokra for WP:G11. Seems like PR.}} Milkywaythegodfather (talk) 17:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Taiwan, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:00, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This appears PROMO. [1], is an un-sourced byline written by staff, in a small local newspaper. Nothing I find for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 19:51, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- the fishy content farms as sources and the previous speedy deletion is a red flag for [WP:PROMO]] in my opinion. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 20:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails any semblance of WP:GNG suitable for WP:ANYBIO. No valid secondary sourcing. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 21:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Clearly fails WP:NBIO, promotional in nature. These sorts of hustle culture marketing people rarely receive meaningful coverage except as a cherry-picked illustrative example for one of those vapid "pull yourself up by your bootstrap" puff pieces and are usually not notable. silviaASH (inquire within) 07:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Though I agree the page is thin, not referenced well, and that it may not seem like a strong page, Chou is a well-known member of his business community who surpasses the notability requirement in my opinion. I will seek other articles to repair the page. KChao1964 (talk) 12:15, 31 March 2025

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Zimmerman, Eilene (2025-03-17). "A Search Engine Entrepreneur Hits the Right Keys". The Village Voice. Archived from the original on 2025-04-05. Retrieved 2025-04-05.
  The article notes: "Over on Jacky Chou’s YouTube channel, many prospective entrepreneurs look for tasks to do for money, often to aid in either some form of SEO. The magnitude of this tit-for-tat battle is stunning. Chou’s company, Indexsy, maintains a behind-the-scenes role, acquiring digital properties and implementing marketing tactics designed to increase their value. ... Raised in Vancouver, British Columbia, Chou, 33, was introduced early to the value of discipline and careful planning. He studied Electrical Engineering at the University of British Columbia, concentrating on power analysis and grid mapping, and participated in the Engineering Mentorship Program. Though he remained focused on technical coursework, he was intrigued by the broader possibilities of the online economy. ... Chou began researching ways to generate income on the internet, and took his first steps into Berlin’s technology scene, working as a Traffic Acquisition Manager at Kontakt.io from June 2016 to December 2016. ... Later, over the course of roughly eleven months at EyeEm, a photography startup, he worked on generating leads from Fortune 1000 companies. He set up lead scoring and nurturing systems, aiming to identify the right time to engage with prospective clients. Meanwhile, Chou had already laid the groundwork for Indexsy, which he founded in 2015 while still based in Vancouver."
2. Dupré, Maggie Harrison (2024-03-18). "SEO Guy Mocks Google for Deindexing His "Gibberish" AI Sites". Futurism. Recurrent Ventures. Archived from the original on 2025-04-05. Retrieved 2025-04-05.
  The article notes: "... Jacky Chou, a well-followed search engine optimization (SEO) guy, laments in a YouTube video about the updates titled "I GOT CLAPPED (Google March Spam Update). ... Chou has been publishing a YouTube video almost every day for months, sharing his SEO tips and tactics for raking in click revenue by gaming Google's algorithm. Many of the practices he recommends, like spinning up synthetic sites or mass-producing AI-generated commerce posts, certainly fall afoul of Google's guidelines. That said, we didn't find Chou through his YouTube channel, or on any other social media. We came across him after stumbling upon some of the automated spam carrying his name. ... The Pixelfy posts are also strikingly similar to the AI-generated "blog" content Chou's churned out at an e-commerce site he owns and operates called Far & Away."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Jacky Chou to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 00:02, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The policies say that articles containing flaws should not be deleted if they can be improved. Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion says, If editing can address all relevant reasons for deletion, this should be done rather than deleting the page. Wikipedia:Editing policy#Wikipedia is a work in progress: perfection is not required says, Perfection is not required: Wikipedia is a work in progress. Collaborative editing means that incomplete or poorly written first drafts can evolve over time into excellent articles. Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome. Cunard (talk) 00:02, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to offer participants opportunity to review the sources presented by Cunard.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:41, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ingelec

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

Non-notable electrical equipment company which appears to be using phony sources. No evidence of meeting WP:NCOMPANY. JTtheOG (talk) 18:38, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Technology, and Morocco. JTtheOG (talk) 18:38, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh–Wahhabi War

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

This is a pseudo-historical fringe article, there is no conflict such as the Sikh–Wahhabi War. This article is misrepresenting and confusing the Barelvi movement for Wahhabism and is compiling disparate conflicts between ethnic groups as a singular religious conflict. No scholars support this narrative. Srijanx22 (talk) 16:16, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, History, Military, Islam, Sikhism, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Undoubtedly pseudohistorical concept with no significant coverage. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 02:56, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Totally out of a revenge nomination for filing this SPI, pfft. I'm afraid I can't win against their canvassing but I'd try my best to give a comment which makes good faith editors turn into the side of keep.
- Oh for God's sake there's a whole chapter which is 9 pages dedicated to this conflict:
  - www.DiscoverSikhism.com. History Of The Sikhs Vol. V The Sikh Lion of Lahore (Maharaja Ranjit Singh, 1799-1839). pp. 159–167.
- Not enough? Here's 22 pages of coverage:
  - Khān, Mu'Īn-Ud-Dīn Aḥmad (1968). "Sayyid Aḥmad Shahīd's Campaign Against the Sikhs". Islamic Studies. 7 (4): 317–338. ISSN 0578-8072.
- Darn it, here's a whole book based on it (crux: pp. 58-131):
  - Adeem (2019-12-18). Sayyid Ahmad Barailvi His Movement And Lagacy From The Pukhtun Perspective By Dr. Altaf Qadir.

Please see more sources in Sikh–Wahhabi War#References which have coverage ranging from pp 2-5, I'm sorry if I'm being a bit too informal, but I'm frustrated because I can't bypass the "Delete" votes by the SPI gang and it looks like they will succeed in taking down a massive notable article. Heraklios 16:33, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you prove how these sources are academic? You are simply falsifying them. Had such a war happened, you could find better sources. Nevertheless, you are falsifying your sources. None of your non academic sources prove how this pseudohistorical concept you came up with is true, including the title itself which is ridiculously incorrect, Wahhabism had no presence in India at the time, Barelvi movement was not Wahhabism. That itself proves that this notion of "Sikh-Wahhabi war" is something you cooked up.

Instead of mentioning a failed SPI, and playing a victim by making personal attacks, you need to focus only on this AfD. Srijanx22 (talk) 05:38, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trivially: Sage Publishing & JSTOR are reliable publishers. We don't need any introduction for Hari Ram Gupta. "You are simply falsifying them. Had such a war happened, you could find better sources. Nevertheless, you are falsifying your sources. None of your non academic sources": Let me be clear, you're proclaiming that given sources are "non-academic"? at this point please respectfully withdraw your frivolous but more like revenge nomination. We can deal with the article title and content issues on the talk page. Heraklios 16:20, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR is not a publisher. That Sage publication you are citing is not about this war. You are still yet to explain how any of those sources give significant coverage to the subject in question. Srijanx22 (talk) 13:41, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not notable and not supported by any of the sources mentioned above, regardless of the bad faith assumed by the article creator, and their clubbing of desperate ethnic conflicts under their own neologism. NXcrypto Message 03:14, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Significant coverage in the sources but I am not satisfied with the title of the page. The title should be either Sikh Barelvi War or Syed Barelvi holy war against Sikhs. Syed was the only one per source who adopted Wahhabi and it was not a whole community of Wahhabi that was part of holy war. Title change and some improvement needs done. RangersRus (talk) 19:30, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think there are plenty of reliable sources/info to keep this article up. However as per the statement made by RangersRus, I believe the title for the page should be changed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Twarikh e Khalsa (talk • contribs) 22:30, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this is a perfectly fine article with significant coverage available. A discussion could be had to come up with a better title but that doesn't warrant deletion. RachelTensions (talk) 13:26, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per TNT, I cross checked some of the sentences in the article and it turns out almost all of it is closely paraphrased. These statements follow the same sequence with minor substitution. This is what I found by only checking one source , I wonder how much of it is copyvio if we were to compare all the sources especially given that the author's contribution history is merely closely paraphrasing sources, suffice to say that keeping this article in current form is not a good idea.

Analysis
Source160-63	Article
The Sayyid's forces consisted of Hindustanis, the Kandharis, Yusafzais and Khataks. The Ghazis were led by Allahbakhsh Khan and the assault was delivered in the early hours of the morning of 21 December, 1826, when the Sikhs lay fast asleep in the intense cold	Ahmad Barelvi, at the head of an allied army of Hindustanis, Kandharis, Yusafzais, and Khattaks, planned a surprise attack against the Sikh troops. The attack, led by Allahbakhsh Khan, was launched in the early hours of 21 December 1826, catching the Sikhs off guard as they slept in the cold.
The first onslaught many Sikhs were killed. Budh Singh immediately organised his troops in battle array and fell upon the Ghazis, and repulsed them. They left the field and retired into the hills	The first attack led to considerable losses among the Sikhs. However, Budh Singh quickly rallied his men and launched a counterattack which forced the enemy to retreat. The Ghazis retreated from the field and the hills.
Budh Singh had won his spurs, but did not follow up his victory. About 500 Sikhs were killed in all, while the Sayyid lost 36 Hindustanis and 46 Kandharis, including Maulvi Baqar Ali of Patna and their commander Allahbakhsh Khan.	While the Sikhs held their ground, they had suffered about 500 casualties. The army of the Syed lost 36 Hindustanis and 46 Kandharis, including Maulvi Baqar Ali of Patna, and their commander, Allahbakhsh Khan.
The Sayyid shifted his headquarters to Sitana at the foot of Mahaban mountains on the western side of the Indus in the heart of Yusafzais.	Syed Ahmad Barelvi shifted his base to Sitana, situated at the foot of the Mahaban mountains on the west bank of the Indus River, in the territory of the Yusafzais
Now the Pathans from all around began to flock under the green flag of the Sayyid. In two months their number grew to 50,000. The Barakzai chiefs of Peshawar with an army of 20,000 strong and 8 pieces of cannon joined them.	Pashtun tribes from various areas began to gather under the command of Syed Ahmad Barelvi, and in two months, their number reached 100,000 men. The Barakzai chiefs of Peshawar joined the movement, and their army consisted of 20,000 men and 8 guns
a Sikh force under Sardar Budh Singh Sandhanwalia concentrated at the village of Pirpai, 32 km south of Peshawar and 30 km from Akora. The Sikh army, comprising about 10,000 troops and 12 cannon, was reinforced by Raja Gulab Singh, Raja Suchet Singh, and Atariwala Sardars	A considerable Sikh force under Budh Singh Sandhanwalia was concentrated at the small village of Pirpai near Saidu situated 32 km south of Peshawar and 30 km from Akora. Budh Singh was joined by Raja Gulab Singh, Raja Suchait Singh and Atariwala sardars. The Sikh army numbered about 10,000 with 12 cannon
The Sikhs lay in their trenches under heavy assaults of the Ghazis for a few days. When their supplies were about to be exhausted, Budh Singh led the attack. The Sikh guns created havoc among the enemy. They took to flight. About 6,000 Mujahidin were killed and wounded. Murray says that the Sikh horsemen gave the fleeing Ghazis a hot pursuit "each Sikh killing fifteen to twenty of the runaways". The Sayyid fled into the Swat hills. Ranjit Singh sent dresses of honour to Budh Singh Sandhanwalia and other commanders.	The Sikhs held their ground even though the Ghazis pressed them heavily for a long time. When their supplies began to run low, Budh Singh made a sally. The Sikh artillery inflicted heavy losses on the enemy, forcing them to retreat. It is estimated that nearly 6,000 Mujahideen were killed or wounded in the battle. Historian Murray affirms that the Sikh cavalry followed the fleeing Ghazis, and every horseman is said to have slain fifteen to twenty of the retreating warriors. Syed Ahmad Barelvi himself took shelter in the Swat hills the jihad movement suffered a crushing defeat. In recognition of the Sikh triumph, Maharaja Ranjit Singh sent congratulatory presents to Budh Singh Sandhanwalia and the other leaders
Sayyid Ahmad began to live with Fatah Khan of Panjtar, a fanatic and one of the bitterest enemies of the Sikhs. With his help the Sayyid commenced coercing the neighbouring chiefs to support him fully in the Jihad against the Sikhs. Ahmad Khan of Hoti, for his lukewarm response, was killed in* an action. The Sayyid brought the entire Yusafzai valley under his sway. Mir Babu Khan of Sadhum, a town on the Kalapani river in Peshawar district was subdued. He looked upon Barakzai sardars of Peshawar as his enemies, and incited the Khaibaris to harass them. Syed Ahmad Barelvi took refuge with Fatah Khan of Panjtar, a staunch opponent of Sikh rule. With the support of Fatah Khan	Syed Ahmad began consolidating his power in the area by forcing the neighboring tribal chiefs to unconditionally support his jihad against the Sikhs. This campaign included the coercion or subjugation of leaders like Mir Babu Khan of Sadhum and Ahmad Khan of Hoti, the latter being killed for his insufficient commitment. Syed Ahmad's influence was extended over the Yusafzai Valley and tribes such as the Afridis, Mohmands, and Khalils were won over to his cause against the Sikhs.

Koshuri ^(グ) 14:03, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. Close paraphrasing together with the baseless notion of "Sikh-Wahhabi war" shows that there is no need for this article. It is misleading to have one. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 15:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Seriously, are we really doing this? It is not productive to bludgeon in an AfD , especially because concerns about close paraphrasing should be raised at WP:CCI, not here.

The article must be Speedy Kept as per the arguments and sources provided above. We should not allow a good amount of notable articles to be removed through the deletion process for these reasons.

If this is being driven by personal conflicts , then I urge you not to turn this encyclopaedia into a battleground or create unnecessary backlogs for the sake of “revenge”. AlvaKedak (talk) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opera Nightclub

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

Orphan article authored in 2013, with an unaddressed maintenance tag for lack of notability also dating to 2013. Created and overwhelmingly most heavily edited (3/4 of its content) by an author with a conflict of interest. Subject venue closed in 2019[2] and is therefore unlikely ever to receive coverage that would confer notability. Wikipedia is not a compendium of every nightclub that has ever existed. Damon Killian (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Georgia (U.S. state). Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:00, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Added sources rapidly; the place, as one source indicates, has "a storied history" and had various names. It's still existing as Domaine (https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/a-new-domaine-takes-over-opera-nightclub-space) but even if it hadn't reopened, an article about this place of historical interest has merit. Thanks.-Mushy Yank. 19:51, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -Mushy Yank. 19:55, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 19:55, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:06, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:SIGCOV. My !vote to keep is only because it has significant coverage. I actually disdain this sort of influencer celebrity culture club. Bearian (talk) 21:16, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:11, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Libnan (Lydia Canaan song)

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

The article on Libnan (Lydia Canaan song) does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for music-related topics as outlined in WP:NOTMUSIC. The song has not received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources and its only notable mention is its use in a Lebanon tourism commercial. This does not satisfy the requirements for standalone articles, such as having won a major award or being an official anthem of a notable entity, as described in WP:NOTABILITY and WP:MUSIC.

Additionally, the article appears to violate WP:PROMO by adopting a promotional tone, emphasizing the song's association with the commercial and awards without independent verification. Using Wikipedia for advertising or promotion is explicitly prohibited by WP:NOTADVERTISING and WP:NPOV. Allowing this article sets a precedent where every soundtrack for every tourism commercial could be eligible for inclusion, which undermines Wikipedia's standards of neutrality and encyclopedic content.

For these reasons, deletion is warranted to uphold Wikipedia's policies on notability and neutrality. Mesoutopia (talk) 14:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Lebanon. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:52, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Only coverage I can pull up is social media or streaming sites. Sources in the article are more about the promotional campaign than about the song. Oaktree b (talk) 15:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewing admin note: OP is a sock. Izno (talk) 20:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tikhon Bernstam

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

Non-notable entrepreneur. Lacks direct and in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 02:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Internet, California, and New Hampshire. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I see lots of good sources. There are some issues with the article, but they are solvable. Bearian (talk) 01:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC) Optionally, this could be merged into Scribd. Bearian (talk) 01:28, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bearian Yes, there are a lot of sources, but if you take a closer look, none of them are in-depth enough to pass WP:SIGCOV bar (almost all of them barely mention him). I'm ok with the redirect or merge as per your suggestion. Gheus (talk) 14:09, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Many sources to establish his notability. Founder of Scribd, Parse, and Rye. In 2012, named as one of the Top 15 CEOs to Watch by Business Insider. — ERcheck (talk) 03:09, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Forbes Australia is not in-depth, just brief coverage: Tikhon Bernstam, Jamie Quint, Saurabh Sharma and Robin Chan. Bernstam, the former cofounder of Parse and Scribd, will oversee the startup’s tokenomics. while WP:BI is not much helpful to prove his notability, especially listicles like this. Gheus (talk) 14:13, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jared Friedman, another co-founder of Scribd, but with COI and notability concerns. Gheus (talk) 14:15, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Closing admin: If you didn't see it above, I'm ok with a merger. Bearian (talk) 15:42, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Trammell

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

Non-notable author, professor, and political candidate. He received some national coverage in 2014 because he was the Democratic nominee in the race where Dave Brat primaried out House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, but not very much. The fact that news coverage of him completely dried up after the 2014 race shows he is not a notable person. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination (jewelry)

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

Although this company probably is notable according to the guidelines, the scope of this article largely duplicates that of Nomination bracelet, and I do not think it merits a separate article. Janhrach (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Products, Fashion, and Italy. Janhrach (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carmen Letizia Giorgianni

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

The sourcing of this article is very weak for a BLP. I do not see any significant independent coverage online, even though she passes WP:NPOL. Janhrach (talk) 16:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Italy. Janhrach (talk) 16:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:45, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As the nominator mentions, the subject passes WP:NPOL as a member of the Italian Parliament. The sourcing currently present in the article certainly leaves a lot to be desired, but from a cursory search there seems to be enough to surpass WP:NOPAGE. Curbon7 (talk) 18:42, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this article may be a copyvio, it seems to closely follow this. Janhrach (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rachele Focardi

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

Does not seem to pass NPEOPLE. I see only passing mentions in independent sources. [3] is an interview, so it is neither secondary nor independent. [4] seems to have some coverage, but if I interpret Acknowledgements correctly, the coverage is primarily based on interviews, so this source is also not independent. I also see a few other interviews, but nothing notability-confering. Janhrach (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Management, Asia, and Italy. Janhrach (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:46, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Millennium Scholastic School & College

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

PROD was contested in 2012 because "verified secondary schools are generally regarded to be notable". Since the February 2017 RFC, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist. Searches of the usual types in English and Bengali found only job postings and a blurb saying Major Gen. Khaled Al-Mamun was guest of honor at their annual sports day.[5] Fails to meet WP:NSCHOOL. Potentially could be redirected to Jahangirabad Cantonment (where it is located) or List of colleges affiliated to the Rajshahi Education Board. Worldbruce (talk) 13:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. Worldbruce (talk) 13:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom , Insufficient coverage by independent, reliable secondary sources to pass WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOOL.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:41, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Bentley

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

Article on CEO of an aviation services company which reads like a resume. References are links to his company website, collated company info by cbinsights, an industry paper about his company completing a training session, and a document by the FAA - none of which are sufficient to demonstrate notability. Page has already been PRODd in the past. Spacepine (talk) 14:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 14:08, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:23, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Philippe Bourret

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

I can find zero google news results. Zip. Google Search results give a paragraph, max, of coverage. Jay Cubby 02:26, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Badminton. Jay Cubby 02:26, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Radio Canada piece from 2020, on his role as school sports director during COVID. This is possibly the same itw. here an article on him from 2004 (non-Olympic). Mentions from the 2004 Sydney Olympics here, here, here. Some non-independent news on his role in Badminton Canada here, here. Mentioned here from a 2002 competition. Apparently the General Director of Sports Montreal, Inc. ([6]). Quoted here in news piece from 2024. --Soman (talk) 10:57, 23 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!} 02:48, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep: The Radio Canada article is more about the school Bourret was at than him specifically, but the RDS article provides the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSBASIC. Let'srun (talk) 21:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:27, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Brooklyn Park TBM-700 crash

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

The article was WP:TOOSOON and the creator has a history of making articles too soon. I only made it cause there was a proposed deletion warning and as of now though, there is more information and no survivors, which might make it be able to stay. If the pilot is the only occupant though, we should delete the article. -Bloxzge 025 ツ — Preceding undated comment added 04:11, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should wait and see with more information if this is going to be significant or not.Lucthedog2 (talk) 02:22, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, United States of America, and Minnesota. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:41, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – "This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 30." Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:46, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•Delete per WP:NOTNEWS, single fatality incident as confirmed by emergency responders on scene, see ASN database for updated narrative. A crash in a highly populated area does not make such crash notable as we shouldnt base articles of what coulda or woulda happened. ASN Database Lolzer3k 14:47, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is just like the Learjet fiasco that happened in Philadelphia, A plane crashed into a highly populated area mind you, just like the learjet in Philly. The page still needs to be updated with info, and needs to be currently updated, as an investigation into this crash is currently going on. I also agree with the people claiming that this article is "too soon" but just like the learjet crash, an investigation is going on. Shaneapickle (talk) 16:51, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just like the Philadelphia crash though as the plane was a medical jet with six occupants including a pediatric kid. It also crashed in a populated area but with a fatality and dozens of injuries. Also, with every plane crash there's an investigation, so that's not a reason to keep it. Plane crashes with a single fatality happen everyday, populated area or not, without articles. This one is no exception. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 23:32, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•Note above arguement by user Shaniapickle seems to be a case of WP:OSE, invalidating their vote. Lolzer3k 14:43, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because this was not an important crash in any sense after all. Lucthedog2 (talk) 19:20, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~I agree since there were no survivors out of the plane that has a capacity of about 7. I only started this when the article was WP:TOOSOON and when a proposed deletion nomination was posted~~.

Delete. Aviation accidents and incidents keep happening (https://www.ntsb.gov/Pages/monthly.aspx) and a fair proportion get reported on some news. The entries that do deserve articles are those which are landmark and follow in radical safety procedure or technology changes (e.g. UA232, or read https://flightsafety.org/asw-article/inadequacies-and-a-misunderstanding/ etc). Waiting with a non-notable article promotes speculations which I feel unhealthy same as explained eg at https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/april/pilot/safety-spotlight-lessons-from-tragedy BACbKA (talk) 10:45, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - WP:NOTTOOSOON. Coverage by independent news sources. The fact that aviation incidents keep happening and reported on does not negate its notability. — ERcheck (talk) 13:17, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
National level news coverage, including CNN and ABC News. — ERcheck (talk) 14:43, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was WP:TOOSOON as the creator made the article within an hour of the crash. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 23:34, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per @ERcheck

Waleed (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: run-of-the-mill light aircraft crash, fails WP:EVENT and in particular WP:EVENTCRIT #4. Also WP:TOOSOON, though of course WP:USUAL caveats apply in the unlikely event that this turns out to have WP:LASTING effects or WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE beyond the initial news cycle. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:51, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. only 1 death. 125.227.26.172 (talk) 02:51, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, only news coverage, no secondary analysis. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:16, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No news about this crash since the day of the crash, fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ROTM. Protoeus (talk) 17:22, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Anoka County–Blaine Airport, the flight's ultimate destination, where short mention should be made as is usually done with aviation incidents. Nathannah • 📮 18:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SpellBrite

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

LED signage product which won a local award in 2013/2014. References are industry magazines / websites, or the local innovation award listing. Editor was paid to create the article. Spacepine (talk) 12:03, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Spacepine (talk) 12:03, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of Arul Carasala

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

This article fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:GNG. The sources are very weak and do not prove that this killing is notable enough to have significant impact on the world. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 11:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, United States of America, and Kansas. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 11:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: This event is still under investigation, and new details might emerge. I wouldn't immediately jump to deletion. 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 11:22, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@LunaEclipse, WP:CRYSTAL. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 12:02, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reading Beans, ??? My intention was to draftify the article and wait for new info to come out, and not add speculation to articles. — 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 15:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. Some parts read like you were expecting some more coverage to come in the future. I should have kept my opinion to myself. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 15:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Illya Kryvoruchko

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

Co-authored one book, which gave a couple of mentions in local news. There are not enough reliable sources to confirm notability. The article was deleted on Ukrainian Wikipedia. Renvoy (talk) 08:39, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Renvoy (talk) 08:39, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Ukraine. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Manupur

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

Non-notable battle; article is cobbled together from passing mentions in various sources and padded out with the "background" and "aftermath" sections. Sources that do exist do not properly verify the content. For example, the date of 10 March 1748 is cited to a book that only says "In a battle fought near Sirhind early in 1748 Qamruddin received a fatal wound but his son Muin ul-Mulk defeated Ahmad Shah Abdali with the support of Safdar Jang." Indian campaign of Ahmad Shah Durrani is a possible redirect target, but I'm not sure it's a good one, and it may be better just to delete this. If redirected, request that the closing admin delete and redirect, as similar articles have been deleted for copyvio reasons and these are frequent sockfarm targets. asilvering (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. asilvering (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While I agree with your other nominations, I disagree with this one and feel Manupur is more relevant. I've seen more significant sources cover it, page could generally be improved though, no doubt. Here's some sources:

[7] [8] [9] Noorullah (talk) 18:59, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Just fyi, we usually use the bolded word "keep" to oppose AfDs.) -- asilvering (talk) 19:24, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, thanks. Noorullah (talk) 00:40, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:14, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Battle of Lahore (1748): and REVDEL any revision that contains a COPYVIO. Page-protect at the first sign of sockpuppetry. A section at the target already contains all sourced, encyclopedic content. Owen× ☎ 18:38, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Sourcing is decent and can be improved. Ramos1990 (talk) 22:45, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maronite flag

AfDs for this article:

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

Was recently redirectly through an AfD, then recreated by the lone voice in that discussion in favor of keeping. The same issues still apply. There is zero in-depth coverage of a flag by this name. Restored the redirect and was promptly reverted, so here we are again. Pinging all the editors who participated in the first AfD: Syphax98, Red Phoenician, OwenX, Toadspike, 4meter4. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:41, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:46, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Diff of additions since the redirect. It looks like several sources have been added. "Complete Flags of the World" is a one-sentence mention that the cedar tree has long been a symbol of the Maronites. "The orange and the ‘Cross in the Crescent’: imagining Palestine in 1929" is a good journal article, but where it mentions Maronites it is mainly focused on the cedar symbol and how it ended up on the Lebanese flag. "Why Do Catholics Eat Fish on Friday?" is the same, explaining why the modern Lebanese flag has a cedar on it. "Double vision in Beirut" is a one-sentence mention in an opinion piece. Page 262 of "Encyclopedia of Stateless Nations: Ethnic and National Groups Around the World" does describe a "Maronite flag", but doesn't seem to (from my searching in the Google Books preview) spend more than a sentence describing the flag itself. "Flags and arms across the world" seems to have almost exactly the same text as "Why Do Catholics Eat Fish on Friday?", which does mention that the Maronites used a white flag with a cedar on it but not much more. I can't search in the "National Eucharistic Congress" source and jeancharaf.org seems to be a dead link. Searching for "drapeau" in "Voyage en Orient, Volume 1: Les femmes de Caire; Druses et Maronites", the only mention about this subject seems to be the sentence "Ce sont les signes qui distinguent les drapeaux des Maronites et ceux des Druses, dont le fond est également rouge d'ailleurs." This sentence doesn't have any context and is very confusing to me – I suspect there was an accompanying image not present in the linked version. The last two sources are cited for mentions of the flag, not analysis, so I presume they contain none.

Some of these sources may already have been present in the pre-redirect version, it's hard to tell. Anyhow, I still don't think the concept of a Maronite flag has received any coverage beyond passing mentions, mostly in sources explaining how the modern Lebanese flag came to be. Thus, I still believe this should be redirected to Flag of Lebanon. Toadspike [Talk] 17:00, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charaf’s source is available via archive as sourced and National Eucharistic Congress is open to search. As for Nerval you have to read the entire quote: “—Allez où vous voudrez, dit-il; tous ces gens là sont fort paisibles depuis que nous sommes chez eux. Autrement, il aurait fallu vous battre pour les uns ou pour les autres, pour la croix blanche ou pour la main blanche. Ce sont les signes qui distinguent les drapeaux des Maronites et ceux des Druses, dont le fond est également rouge d'ailleurs.” Red Phoenician (talk) 02:30, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: What is the Wikipedia policy for dealing with this situation? Should @Red Phoenician have gone to deletion review even though the page was not actually deleted but rather redirected? Stockhausenfan (talk) 19:41, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review (DRV) is only for reviewing whether the close accurately reflected the consensus reached in the discussion, not for relitigating the issues discussed in the AfD, so it is probably not what what Red Phoenician was aiming for. Also, if the recreated page is a duplicate of the original, it can be speedy-deleted under WP:G4, but the new sources probably make this different enough that G4 does not apply here. Toadspike [Talk] 01:00, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The previous AfD had a clear consensus to redirect, and I don't think it should be possible to overturn it in this way (with limited engagement with the new AfD) without the restorer of the redirect having made any effort to demonstrate that the changes to the article now establish notability. I.e. I don't think it makes sense to close this as "no consensus" simply due to lack of participation, since there is a preexisting consensus. Stockhausenfan (talk) 04:34, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The original reasoning was that there were not enough sources to back the existence of a flag. Now that there are plentiful sources on multiple flags the goalposts have been changed to require sources of even more detail. Must there be an entire book dedicated to the history of the Maronite flag? The sources include many vexillological books/articles which should be adequate. Furthermore the claim that the Maronite flag is identical to the Lebanese flag is disingenuous for two reasons. Firstly, it implies that Lebanon and its flag were created solely for the Maronites and disenfranchises other religious groups of Lebanon. Secondly, this implies that the Maronite Cross flag and flag under Bashir Shihab II have any relation with the Lebanese flag which is not true and to paint them as such would be misinformation. Red Phoenician (talk) 02:10, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Flag of Lebanon: and page-protect so that we don't have to go through this yet again four months from now. Consensus was very clear in the November AfD, and none of the facts or sources have changed to vacate our previous decision. I assumed good faith in the previous AfD, but can't see this as anything other than POV-pushing now. Owen× ☎ 18:17, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This page has enough sources to justify its existence

Maropedia1 (talk) 21:13, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Flag of Lebanon per OwenX. Ramos1990 (talk) 23:02, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arts Council~Haliburton Highlands

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

Arts council that fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. A BEFORE search, I could not find any other sources that weren't liked to the organization or a brief, trivial mention, it has got some local news coverage, but I'm not sure if that can cement notability. Not to mention almost the entire article's tone is promotional. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 18:04, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 18:04, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The Arts Council- Haliburton Highlands has received independent + detailed in local news at the very least [10][11]. The events they put on in the region have also received non-trivial coverage [12]. They received direct support from the Canadian government to start an ongoing symposium on performing arts in rural communities [13]. News about the organization has been presented in the Toronto Star as well [14] .This coverage spans at least a decade, so it's not a small burst. Between the primary source of its website and local coverage that is sometimes included in major Canadian newspapers, it seems like the council is notable + provides a significant amount of arts programming in the Haliburton region. I vote to keep though I agree the article should be updated.
Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 23:31, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reply sources 1,2,3 and 5 come up with 404 pages, are they availble on the Wayback Machine? ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 01:44, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I malformatted the links. The links are fixed and the pages are still live. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 22:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts and Organizations. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:14, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is more of a promotion for the orgnaization than anything else. Was created by a single pupose editor in 2009 with not much editing from any other editor since. Probably COI issue. Ramos1990 (talk) 22:38, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - The original author itself was banned in 2009 for being an advertising account, something seems fishy here. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 01:29, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: A lot of the article text concerns the history of arts initiatives in the area prior to the formation of this Arts Council: such content probably belongs in Haliburton_County#Arts_and_culture (suitably referenced, though). That leads to a wider suggestion that a merge and redirect may be a possibility? AllyD (talk) 07:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sexphone & the Lonely Wave

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

This film does not satisfy WP:NFILM. The article itself has no sources and a Google search only yields database websites and pirated copies of the film. Cyrobyte (talk) 22:18, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Thailand. Shellwood (talk) 22:28, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect to List of Thai films#2003~~: released at a time when online sources were not the rule - sources https://movie.kapook.com/view237630.html (other equivalent lists exist); https://entertainment.trueid.net/detail/y2w5w99dOmGV https://www.siamzone.com/movie/m/1339 Alt title: The Girl Next Door -Mushy Yank. 10:32, 30 March 2025 (UTC) Keep, thanks, @Paul 012:.-Mushy Yank. 16:24, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and rename to Sex Phone and the Girl Next Door, which appears to be the modern release title. A major feature film in its day. Still receiving coverage two decades later in the TrueID piece linked above by Mushy Yank, which discusses the film and its real-life performance, as well as review websites Khobsanam[15] and Kodungmovie[16]. Google Books shows it got a full page review in the Siam Rath Weekly Review[17]. Further offline sources entirely likely to exist. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the multiple reliable sources coverage identified above by Paul 12, including coverage ten years after the film's release, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:45, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Recently created article. Neeeds some good sources. It is better in draftspace, than mainspace for the time being. Ramos1990 (talk) 22:30, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:02, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Descent Into Madness (EP)

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

The only coverage I could find on this album is already present in the article, and I'm not convinced that's enough for notability. Half of the sources are routine news coverage, which isn't typically counted toward notability unless there's an overwhelming amount of it, and the other half are reviews from websites which I'm not convinced of the reliability of. Boolin Tunes maybe has potential, but I'd need to see it discussed first, while New Transcendence and Metal Noise are both blogs with very few writers and no evidence of an editorial policy or anything else that makes a proper publication reliable. If, at best, there is one reliable review for this album, I don't believe the subject is notable, and you can understand why I redirected it in the first place and think that it should remain a redirect. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:45, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:45, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If I added more notable sources, would the article be allowed to remain? Doomed Shadow (talk) 10:38, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on what the sources are. If it's more routine news coverage then probably not (oftentimes, reporting on album announcements/single releases are just based on press releases and don't contain much original reporting, so they aren't highly valued in terms of reliability). If there are reviews I missed, or anything else based on original writing, then there's a better chance. Some of that could also come out in the future; a huge amount of an album's notability comes about around the time of its release, but there are also opportunities later on such as year-end lists or late chart appearances. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 21:20, 23 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!} 23:01, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that no additional edits have been made since my nomination (aside from me removing a category immediately after). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 08:07, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums#AfD notice. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 13:30, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not seeing significant coverage in established secondary sources. Popcornfud (talk) 13:52, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Weak Keep. I agree that the existing sourcing is not great - either routine coverage, or sites of questionable reliability. However, it did get reviewed by Hot Metal Magazine, which apparently used to be a significant print magazine in Australia for heavy metal and hard rock. So that's reliable significant coverage. There's also a review by a Spanish-language site that might be reliable. It seems to have some staff, but it's unclear how the structure works.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 17:00, 2 April 2025 (UTC) Update: I looked over Boolin tunes and I think that's fine. Might not be that major a site, but I see that it has an identifiable editorial structure, which is what I'd want to be assured of its editorial oversight and responsibility for accurate content.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 17:54, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also found this review by a German site. The site not only has an editorial team but has an individual who is legally bound by the government to be responsible for the content on the site: [18]. 3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 17:58, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I see other articles for other albums for them Foundation of Bones, Death: An Anthology, etc. Links found here [19]. if these are not notable, then they should also be nominated for deletion. Ramos1990 (talk) 22:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ramos1990 WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid reason to keep an album, and especially not if you aren't explaining why those other articles should be considered notable (or even suggesting that they may also be non-notable). Please consider the tenets of NALBUM when explaining your vote, or else it ends up more of a distraction than a valuable contribution to the discussion. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:11, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:00, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asle og Alida

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

Article about an upcoming new opera, not reliably sourced as passing inclusion criteria. As always, operas are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy media coverage about them -- but this is "referenced" solely to the self-published website of the opera company that's producing it, with no media coverage or analysis about it shown at all.
No prejudice against recreation later in the year if and when it does have adequate GNG-worthy coverage to satisfy inclusion standards, but a single primary source is not sufficient for it to already have an article now. Bearcat (talk) 16:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Norway. Bearcat (talk) 16:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - I found this news article and also this. Both are in Norwegian, for which I can only read a few cognates. Ping me if more information comes up. Bearian (talk) 03:34, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With a Nobel prize-winning librettist and notable composer, I don't think we need a crystal ball to know that there will be SIGCOV of this opera, whether it's a success or a flop. Its premiere is 5 days away - why delete it when it can be expanded and have more sources added in less than a week? The NRK source found by Bearian could be added now; the other source is paywalled for me. (No, I can't read Norwegian - I just put it in Google Translate, which is good enough to provide the info that it was commissioned by Eivind Gullberg Jensen, the current director of the Bergen Opera, and Frank Kjosås will take the title role, despite never having sung in an opera before ...) RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:29, 24 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!} 23:32, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This opera premiered at the second largest opera house in Norway, the libretto written by a noble prize laureate and a Grawemeyer award composer… 158.248.40.59 (talk) 08:27, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Things get Wikipedia articles if and when they have WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about them in media, and are not automatically entitled to be included in Wikipedia just because they exist. So it's not a question of the fact that it premiered, it's a question of showing WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about it in media. Bearcat (talk) 21:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Kjosås does not have the title role, he plays Asleik (not Asle) which is mainly a speaking role, with few line of singing.--158.248.40.59 (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now. I likely wouldn't have created it prior to the premiere...but it has been created. And since it's been premiered I expect to see some reviews in the next couple of months (I'll try to remember to look for one in next month's issue of Opera magazine, or the following one.) We can revisit in a few months if the reviews are not forthcoming, but I expect them to be. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Though article created in late march 2025, I think we should give it some time before nominating for delete. Barely premiered. After a while it is not notable, then perhaps nominate for delete. Ramos1990 (talk) 21:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 06:50, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Levy

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

This article does not demonstrate that the subject meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. Wikipedia evaluates notability primarily through two pathways: the general notability guideline (GNG), which requires significant coverage in reliable, independent, secondary sources with strong editorial oversight, and subject-specific notability guidelines (SNG), which are tailored to specific fields like academics, athletes, or entertainers.

In this case, the article appears to concern a religious figure, not an academic, so WP:NACADEMIC is not applicable. The more relevant SNG is WP:NPERSON, which still requires significant coverage in reliable, independent sources that are not directly affiliated with the subject.

After reviewing the sources:

CheckCompany provides a minimal corporate profile with no substantial coverage. (Too sparse)
ReformJudaism.org.uk is a primary source from an organization the subject leads. (Not independent)
Jewish News focuses on organizational developments and only briefly mentions Levy. (Wrong subject)
Leo Baeck College profile is uncredited and potentially self-authored. (Unreliable, likely self-published)
JewishGen is about a synagogue building, not Levy himself. (Too sparse, Wrong subject)

These sources fail to provide the significant, in-depth, and independent coverage required for notability under either GNG or NPERSON. Without substantial third-party coverage—particularly from newspapers, religious publications, or similar sources—there is no verifiable basis for inclusion. As it stands, the article should be deleted for lack of notability.

Alexnewmon2623 (talk) 02:39, 30 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 30. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:52, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Judaism, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:45, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete-~~ Reason above Alexnewmon2623 (talk) 20:58, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:AFDLIST - as the nominator recommending deletion, you should not also !vote. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC) (She's right, your nomination is your vote, you can't cast a duplicate one. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:43, 6 April 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Keep As the chief executive of the Movement for Reform Judaism and co-leader of the new Progressive Judaism (UK) movement [20], [21], I think he is probably notable per WP:RELPEOPLE. He is not the Chief Rabbi, who is inherently notable, but as co-leader (with Charley Baginsky) of a group that covers 30% [22] of Jewish people affiliated with synagogues in the UK, this is still a subtantial position. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article could be better but he is notable as the joint leader of a significant religious movement in the UK.

Rafts of Calm (talk) 13:17, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:44, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cage of Agony

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

Pretty much the same content as in Mogul Embassy and Gates of Agony. Suggest redirect to either of them. BinaryBrainBug (talk) 15:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. BinaryBrainBug (talk) 15:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:57, 30 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!} 06:39, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sheikhani Group of Companies

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

Fails WP:NCORP, sources are not reliable and independent. GrabUp - Talk 08:04, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Pakistan, and United States of America. GrabUp - Talk 08:22, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed content from prior to semi-protection.

What do u mean they arent reliable there are so many reliabe sources in it. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:5DB4:CFC1:D03F:EE02 (talk) 14:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this article shouldn't be deleted because the company and owner both are notable. WP:N Zaidtessori (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is does not make any sense. There are sources listed above and the page had sources and add on's that it seems others are deleting. does being a buissnessman & constable in the us not make a person notable. wow 2600:4040:2012:DD00:5DB4:CFC1:D03F:EE02 (talk) 15:02, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this article has many reliable sources in it. i have seen wikipedia articles with less than 4 unreliable sources and you guys didnt delete them. this article is about a company owned by a notable person named ali sheikhani. Ahmadalir (talk) 15:07, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep article is notable & falls under the criteria of notability WP:N Davidmathew11123 (talk) 15:23, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep sources look notable to me. sources like news channels are notable like these https://katychristianmagazine.com/2023/12/06/meet-police-officer-and-self-made-businessman-ali-sheikhani-republican-candidate-for-fort-bend-county-constable-pct-3/ https://uspto.report/TM/98158126/FTK20230830173009/ there are a lot more sources that are reliable and notable so this article shouldn't be deleted. Mrbeast221 (talk) 15:30, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sources are reliable and independent. Janghirbutt (talk) 15:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Draftspace: Brother instead can someone it to a draft so i will work on it and then submit it for afc draft. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:5DB4:CFC1:D03F:EE02 (talk) 15:41, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep this article shouldn’t be deleted as it has some reliable sources instead it should get the tag of more citations needed. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:F953:498E:34F9:B100 (talk) 17:42, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article has a few Reliable Sources. Article can rely on those sources. shouldn’t get deleted instead get a tag about needing more citations. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:9:9C:6201:76B0 (talk) 17:48, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has reliable citations shouldn’t get deleted. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:441:F5D2:FB86:14FC (talk) 17:50, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sources look independent and reliable. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:856C:CC4D:E3C6:CFB9 (talk) 17:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article Falls under notability it shouldn’t be deleted. 2600:4040:2012:DD00:F4C7:2A79:AC6D:4C0A (talk) 17:56, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article has independent and reliable sources . Falls under notability WP:NCORP 141.156.233.91 (talk) 18:02, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying my best to improve it. i dont know what the decision would be but i will try my best thanks, 141.156.233.91 (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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}}.

Delete: Ridiculous amount of ref-bombing of nearly all useless references - scrapers, junk sites, passing mentions. The very few that have even moderately indepth coverage are churnalism or from regional sources only. Ravensfire (talk) 19:56, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There are a few mentions and press releases (churnalism) but none of them cover this group in detail beyond routine coverage. Fails WP:NCORP. Veldsenk (talk) 05:27, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Although they are "hatted", it seems problematic to discount 13 editors arguing to Keep or Draftify in favor of 2 editors advocating Deletion. Is there any indications all of these IPs are socks?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:36, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Yes, all of these are sock accounts and have been blocked. See the SPI for details. GrabUp - Talk 06:41, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lianna Rebolledo

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

PROD'd this back in 2023, more citations were added and tag was removed but I don't think they're reliable/independent enough to give her notability. GraziePrego (talk) 03:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Health and fitness, Latin America, and Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:23, 23 March 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 05:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the article. It isn't sourced very well right now and the sources in English are pro-life sources that may not be independent to give her notability. If you search for sources in Spanish there are reliable news organizations reporting on her though. N3rsti (talk) 19:16, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Delete - Sources in English are lacking. Happy to believe there are better sources in Spanish, but we simply cannot have a WP:BLP with no reliable citations. No prejudice against recreation with better sources. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:04, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please see above: "Ineligible for soft deletion". Geschichte (talk) 10:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:33, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Osagie Osarenkhoe

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

Fails WP:GNG or WP: ANYBIO. All the sources are either not reliable or not independent. The awards too could not help either because they are just run of the mills Ibjaja055 (talk) 05:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 05:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Music. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NPRODUCER, this is still up and coming though, so I expect some coverage in the future. But for now, no. The awards are vanity and not do count towards notability here. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:08, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The recognition section has notable awards that has been or been nominated for so they meet WP:ANYBIO. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 09:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Reading Beans The awards in the section do not automatically qualify the subject for a Wikipedia article without reliable and independent sources. Of course, I have gone through the sources and most of them are not from reliable news media. The ones from reliable news media are puff pieces like this this, and this or press releases of her parting ways with Wizkid.Ibjaja055 (talk) 05:41, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not have an opinion on the sourcing. Statements sourced to unreliable sources can always be removed but sadly, that’s not what deletion is for and as the article shows, the recognition section is sourced. Now, back to my argument: the policy I am citing is WP:ANYBIO#1; The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times—emphasises are mine. The recognition section has 2 nominations from The Future Awards Africa and an additional 2 nominations from The Beatz Awards. Now, unless you’re arguing that those awards are not notable, then this subject is clearly notable. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 06:41, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to ping: Ibjaja055. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 06:59, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: she has been nominated four times more than 3 notable awards,The Future Awards Africa and The Beatz Awards which demonstrates sufficient notability per Wikipedia's guidelines. These nominations are supported by reliable sources, each confirming the subject's recognition in her field. Even though she hasn't won any awards, her repeated nominations show a consistent level of notability in her field. Afro 📢Talk! 14:39, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: She’s notable as an artist manager. And has 4 nominations in two different notable awards four times definitely cuts the criteria in ANYBIOS1. Afro 📢Talk! 14:55, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per my comments above. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 05:56, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have conflicting opinions here on whether or not this subject's award nominations are supported by reliable sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:33, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soft Delete: I believe that this person has not achieved notability yet, but as @Vanderwaalforces said, she is up and coming. I believe that once she gains more coverage in reliable and independent sources, an article for her could be re-evaluated. She hasn't reached the notability criteria yet. If we're just factoring in the awards itself that she has received, they are not inherently notable.

WormEater13 (talk) 13:33, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is absolutely no policy cited here. The awards section is cited reliable sources and if you are in doubt of the notability of the awards to satisfy NANYBIO#1, then nominate them for deletion. Until, this !vote is not policy based. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 14:49, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lori Perkins

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

Only independent sources I can find are ones that mention her in passing. Created over a declined AfC in 2015 by a single-purpose account editing about Perkins and her publishing company. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:30, 30 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. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:30, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Women, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Obviously non-notable subject, promotional BLP. silviaASH (inquire within) 07:26, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but stubify. Underneath the promotional tone is a lot of important work in publishing award-winning Lesbian writers. The Lambda Literary Awards are the Pulitzers of queer writing, and her imprints have for over a dozen years published many notable women's literature, including Cecilia Tan. I don't know the subject, but I met Tan once or twice at SF Cons. Can I take a crack at this? Thanks for your patience. Bearian (talk) 22:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC) P.S. I've started to work on it. Bearian (talk) 22:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC) P.P.S. I cut out what can't be sourced or is out of date, and added a source. I considered a merger but upon further reflection took it back. Discuss. Bearian (talk) 03:29, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as between the three book reviews, awards, and coverage about her agency and e-book house there seems to be enough for at least WP:NAUTHOR if not WP:BASIC. The article is a bit of a mess and would benefit from a re-write. Nnev66 (talk) 18:38, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:31, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allegations of Corruption in Human Rights Organization

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

Do we need an article like this? Even if it’s needed, the current article is likely written by an LLM and is not at all neutral, failing to meet NPOV. All these controversies have separate articles. GrabUp - Talk 06:07, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The NPOV claim is unsubstantiated; no specific examples or diffs are provided, violating WP:AFD. The LLM comment is irrelevant — Wikipedia evaluates content based on its compliance with WP:NPOV and WP:V, not who or what wrote it. This article follows WP:SUMMARYSTYLE, providing an overview of a broader trend by synthesizing content from multiple related articles. If there are neutrality concerns, they should be addressed through editing, not deletion, per WP:Deletion is not cleanup and WP:PRESERVE.

i appreciate your concerns, allow me to address them rather than delete the article. For the AI usage, I used AI to improve my scentences cohesion / grammer etc. the text is originally mine but I just made AI correct grammer / vocabs, etc. if that is not allowed, I am happy to rewrite the whole thing and bot passing it through AI. Doo2doo2 (talk) 08:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GPTZero says that there is a high chance that this is AI-generated, too. @Doo2doo2 Please write in your own word why this article should not get deleted.

And FYI, per WP:AIFAIL, AI-generated text usually fails WP:OR, WP:V and WP:NPOV. 🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥^{(ContainThisEmber?)} 09:51, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - GPTZero shows 100% AI-generated text, and with the " ** " mark on "Allegations of corruption in human rights organizations** ", no doubt that the whole text is AI-generated, which usually fails WP:OR, WP:V and WP:NPOV. And this article doesn't make any sense either. The article is about allegations of corruption but the content inside it are mostly nothing like it, like with the Amnesty International faced criticism for toxic workplace culture or Human Rights Watch faced criticism for ideological bias. And furthermore with sentences like "as detailed in the Amnesty International controversy page" or "as noted in the Transparency International controversies article", you might as well be telling readers to read those pages.

🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥^{(ContainThisEmber?)} 09:46, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this is clearly WP:SYNTH, and it construes a trend that is not present in any cited source. Also, the definition of 'Corruption' here is treated very, very loosely. --Soman (talk) 09:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Organizations. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:29, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hus Kingpin

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

No indication that this meets WP:NMUSIC, most of the sources are bandcamp and spotify links. A WP:BEFORE didn't turn up any good sources either. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:45, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:54, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lil' Eto

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

Not notable rapper, I can't find much aside from WP:BANDCAMP and other user generated sources. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:38, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:54, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Percy Keith

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

I don't see anything that indicates WP:NMUSIC or even GNG. The best sources are local news coverage of Percy Keith being arrested for drug / gun charges, which definitely doesn't contribute to notability. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:37, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Crime, and Louisiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:55, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ankhlejohn

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

The sources in the article and a WP:BEFORE mostly turn up press releases and interviews in non-RSes. I don't see anything that indicates general notability or WP:NMUSIC. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:34, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:56, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A-Wax

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC and GNG, and seems like a trojan horse of BLP violations since a lot of the information around rap feuds is unsourced. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:57, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nyomi Banxxx

AfDs for this article:

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

This doesn't seem to meet WP:NENTERTAINER. It's super promotional but that could be fixed if the subject was notable, which doesn't seem to be the case. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Radio, Sexuality and gender, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:58, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ronilo Balbieran

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

I can't see anything in the article that indicates notability. A WP:BEFORE search didn't turn up anything either. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:14, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Economics, and Philippines. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:59, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notabilty not there yet WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:16, 6 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

International Association for Philosophy and Literature

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

This article does not cite any sources. I have tried to personally search for any reliable, secondary, and independent sources about this subject, but have came to find none. Therefore, this makes me question the actual integrity and accuracy of this article, leading me to AfD this article. WormEater13 (talk) 03:07, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Organizations, and United States of America. WormEater13 (talk) 03:07, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to its founder Hugh J. Silverman. There are plenty of mentions on Google Books and Google Scholar, but as far as I could tell all of them are either not SIGCOV of the organisation or were written by people who are themselves affiliated with the organisation (including this one). It has a fairly long history and has been affiliated with plenty of notable people so it's possible that I've missed something, but I couldn't find anything that would come close to a WP:GNG-qualifying source. MCE89 (talk) 11:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Youth Service America

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

This article lacks notability - specifically, reliable, secondary sources that are not just interviews. WormEater13 (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Washington, D.C.. WormEater13 (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As the nominator says, its the article that lacks citations, not the organization that lacks notability. I have added a half-dozen citations from reliable 3rd party sources and will continue to work on it until the nominator is satisfied. Freechild (talk) 19:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ma'ariful Qur'an

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

This article has been tagged for original research, unreliable sources, and unverified content since 2018. Although I have attempted to address these concerns, the article remains poorly sourced and lacks sufficient content to stand as a standalone page. I propose a redirect.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 02:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Islam, and Pakistan. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 02:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Raymond C King

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

Fails WP:NPRODUCER. Most of the sources presented are either unreliable or have no connection to the subject in question. A WP:BEFORE shows very little coverage, which proves that the subject isn't notable enough. Article also appears to be an autobiography, so WP:COI issues are a possibility. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:43, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Engineering, Software, California, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:00, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fiona Foster

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

No sign of notability, search returns nothing. Allan Nonymous (talk) 01:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United Kingdom. Allan Nonymous (talk) 01:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, Radio, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:01, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: Have added two references but the article still needs additional references.

Al-Farooq (book)

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

I removed some unverified and unsourced content from the page. It was already a stub, and now it's even shorter. Deletion seems to be the most appropriate option.–𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 01:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and India. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 01:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:15, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Yvanovich

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

Please see this diff from before I removed a section. I wasn't going to AfD this at first, but after digging into it more, I don't see any redeemable sources, nor could I find any on my own. This article was created by a paid editor and moved from the draftspace themselves, however, it occurred 110 days ago so draftification was not an option. The only source that could be approaching significant coverage is the Yahoo News article, everything else is primary sources, WP:PASSINGMENTIONS, etc. Without the puffery, this article says little more than "This is someone who exists." MediaKyle (talk) 01:48, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. MediaKyle (talk) 01:48, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philippines, Vietnam, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:50, 30 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!} 00:47, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doorman (character)

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

A minor superhero in Marvel comics and a member of the Great Lakes Avengers. Doorman has very little in the way of coverage; a search only turns up WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS, which do not indicate notability, or brief mentions as part of the Great Lakes Avengers when that group receives separate discussion. He is not individually notable from the Great Lakes Avengers, and I feel as though a redirect there should more than suffice given what little coverage of him exists. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:26, 30 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. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on sources that have been added to the article. BOZ (talk) 12:57, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The bulk of these sources are either plot summary or hail from trivial mentions or Wikipedia:VALNET. There's little in the way of SIGCOV or an actual indication of the importance of the character here. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 20:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the claims that were made by @BOZ: or merge with List of Marvel Comics characters: D in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE should no worthy sources be found. --Rtkat3 (talk) 22:15, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have opinions for a Keep, Redirect or Merge so more arguments are welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:38, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY. If not kept I think a merge would be best. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 00:47, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]